The Akhilesh Yadav government’s ‘benevolence’ in the dropping of a few terror cases against Muslim suspects is leading to a communal polarisation in the state of Uttar Pradesh (perhaps this was the ruling dispensation’s intention anyway) ahead of the looming Lok Sabha polls. Five high court lawyers, all from the Hindu community, have now filed a PIL challenging the UP government’s “unconstitutional act”. In the first week of June, a two-judge bench of the Allahabad High Court stayed the process of withdrawal of prosecutions and referred the matter to a larger bench. The matter is due for a hearing sometime next month.
The general impression the whole episode has created is that the Muslim community ought be indebted to the Samajwadi Party for extending it inordinate privileges. The only ground touted before the courts by the government in defence of its decision is the “fostering of communal harmony and public interest”. But a fundamental question is still not addressed here—were the Muslims against whom the cases are being sought to be withdrawn guilty of said acts of terrorism? In other words, the government has proceeded to drop the cases without first establishing the innocence of those whom it wants to exonerate. Not surprisingly, the courts are unwilling to accept this fallacious method, especially since the cases involve not any ordinary act of criminality but the actual cynical mass murder of innocent civilians.
A year-long research based mainly on the internal and classified records of different anti-terror agencies, including the UP anti-terrorism squad, revealed that successive regimes in the state have consciously followed a process that is calculated to thwart the course of justice.
In a letter petition filed with the Allahabad HC a week ago, I have annexed dozens of classified documents that have been in the possession of the UP government but were never shared with the courts. These documents compellingly establish that the police agencies in UP have all along had evidence of the innocence of at least nine of the accused Muslims (three of whom are Bangladeshis) arrested in seven different terror cases but still persisted with the prosecutions. Now the Samajwadi government, instead of revealing the full truth and restoring the constitutional rights of these innocent Muslims (most of them are poor and very young), is turning the issue of national security and justice into an incendiary communal discourse. Clearly, the object is the potential electoral gains in the coming elections.
These documents also show that one of the ‘suspects’, Khalid Mujhaid, who recently died in mysterious circumstances in judicial custody and whose death has led to widespread protests, was not involved in the terror act for which he had been incarcerated. If these documents had been shared with the courts in time, Khalid may have still been breathing today, living a free life with his family.
This politics over terror is not only perpetuating a gross injustice against those wrongly implicated but also denying justice to the victims of the terror strikes. Over the last 10 years, hundreds of innocent lives have been lost to terror attacks across the country. The least that the near and dear ones of the victims deserve is the full truth established through a credible and fair process of law.
In Uttar Pradesh, this is how the story of the terror investigation unfolded. Between 2005-07, different cities in UP were repeatedly hit by bomb attacks. Dozens of ordinary citizens perished and many more were maimed. Different agencies of the UP police like the Special Task Force, the UP ATS and district police of Lucknow, Faizabad, Gorakhpur and Varanasi investigated these cases. The end result: about a dozen Muslim youths like Khalid Mujhaid, Waliullah and Tariq Qazmi were arrested for different bomb attacks.
After September 2008, anti-terror agencies across India came together claiming to have unearthed a single, integral terror plot hatched by a mysterious terror outfit named Indian Mujahideen. Combined efforts led to the arrest of dozens of terror suspects across India and subsequent pooling of information. Many of the suspects arrested post-September 2008 apparently told their interrogators of their involvement in several blasts across UP besides blasts in other parts of the country like Delhi, Jaipur and Ahmedabad.
Our portal Gulail has managed to unearth interrogation reports of six terror suspects—Sadiq Israr Shaikh, Arif Badar alias Laddan, Mohammed Saif, Saifur Rahman, Sarwar and Mohammed Salman—who were nabbed by different agencies like the Mumbai Crime Branch, Madhya Pradesh ATS and UP ATS on different dates between September 2008 and March 2010. According to the internal records of these agencies, all six accused have given a detailed and meticulous account of their involvement in the ‘single terror conspiracy’ of which the seven terror strikes pertaining to the state of UP were also a part. These seven terror cases are:
Significantly, these ‘interrogation’ reports make absolutely no mention whatsoever of the involvement of the nine youths who were originally arrested and chargesheeted by the UP police for these blasts. In fact, the terror plot as narrated by these six terror suspects (as recorded by different agencies on different dates) completely debunks the state prosecution’s case as its stands today in all seven terror strikes in both material and minute details. The narrative given by these six accused is consistent with the case of different agencies in different cities outside Uttar Pradesh. But in UP, instead of reinvestigating all these cases and finding the real culprits, the UP police launched a massive cover-up. Either the revelations of this new set of six accused were brushed under the carpet or were doctored by the UP police to persist with prosecutions that they full well knew to be completely farcical.
So, in the case of the Lucknow and Faizabad court blasts and also in the Gorakhpur triple blasts case, the UP police fabricated an imaginary connection between the accused originally arrested and the terror suspects arrested many months later (in some cases a few years after the arrest of the original ‘accused’). Two completely conflicting narratives were thus married to retrospectively validate the old investigations and to cover-up the wrongful arrests made previously. So, while on the one hand the investigating agencies kept pursuing sham prosecutions, state regimes like the Samajwadi Party made a wishy-washy attempt to withdraw some of these farcical prosecutions. But even here, the evidence of innocence was not presented before the courts trying these cases. Nor was it made public.
(The author is founder of the website www.gulail.com)
Apropos Ashish Khetan’s column (You Are Hereby A Terrorist, Jul 22), Muslims in India have nowhere to go, and nothing to do, except to rue their fate. In votebank politics, Muslims are indispensable, and have always been used as pawns. Meanwhile, innocent ones go to jail, and some are killed in an extra-judicial manner.
Thank you to all those who have taken the trouble to read the article and share their thoughts. Out of the arguments made here, there are two that perhaps need answering. So here they go.
1. The first part of the article compares outcomes (relative percentages of population of the religions concerned) irrespective of the process that led to those outcomes - whether immigration, relatively faster population growth or conversions. This was for two reasons. One, to put the figure of 2.3 per cent in "numerical perspective", as the article itself explained. The second reason was that outcomes are ultimately what the crux of debate is about. The rest of the article in any case dealt with process - or conversions in this case, from both a contemporary and historical perspective.
2. Some commenters have tried to cast doubts on the reliability of Census 2001. Those who do this should bear in mind that Census 2001 was conducted by a BJP government. Considering the extreme importance that BJP gives to this issue, it would be reasonable to expect that IF it had perceived a problem with the methodology that was distorting the numbers, it would have fixed it. As the article mentioned, BJP or BJP-supported governments have been in power for 10 of the last 40 years, or about a quarter of the time, and the only reasonable conclusion one can arrive at is that any misreporting of numbers, real or perceived, would be marginal and hence, not of importance.
To all other arguments made, my answer is the following: Please read the article again, with particular focus on the quotations of Vivekananda and Monier Williams, and the history of the missionary efforts in Bengal and their outcome.
Musims lives are cheap all over the world.In India BJP needs them to be slagutered at the alter of Hindutva and for the so called secular parties as a vote bank politics.In India this is notthing but state terrorism and it is a shame that none of the so called secular parties are interested in stopping.
The Sikhs feel the same way as Muslims feel and it is no wonder they voted the only secualr alternative AAP.Sikhs in India feel that their temple has been attacked by Hindus and they have been massacred in Delhi riots by the Hindus.This is despite calling them a part of Hindu family by RSS.
If RSS has a Hindutva ideology they can simply propagate and win elections and they do not need indulge in violence against Muslims.All this shows they have an ideology that is not acceptable to Indians and the only way is to bring in surreptiously through violence on Muslims orchestrated by the police,intelligence agencies,bureacracy and sometimes the judiciary.Shame on Indians to have elected a party that professes this ideology and kills thousands using the state apparatus and spread injustice.
Ten months after being arrested as a ‘terrorist’ for his alleged role in the 2002 bomb blast case in Mumbai, a techie from Hyderabad has been cleared of all charges. The Mumbai police have admitted to the special court here that they found ‘no evidence’ against him. Much before his arrest, for 10 years, the police had been claiming that Taj-ul Kazi Siddiqui, 40, was the main conspirator of the 2002 Ghatkopar bus blast case. In a charge sheet filed in 2003, he was named one of the 29 accused and was shown as wanted. On November, 2012, a team of Mumbai police arrested him from Hyderabad and booked him under stringent sections of the Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA) and various sections of the Indian Penal Code. He was later released on bail in April, 2013.
Settled in Hyderabad for almost a decade, Mr. Siddiqui was a senior employee with HCL. He was immediately terminated from his job, for being ‘allegedly’ involved in ‘terror’ activities. For 10 months, his family repeatedly claimed that he was innocent. (The Hindu).
Not much has changed in U.P. since the 1980s when I was a cub reporter/ sub-editor at the Pioneer. It was usual even at that time for the police to arrest any defenseless person (preferably one with a criminal background) in connection with any unrelated crime. This was mostly done to pacify the IPS babuas (they were called "babuas" because they were considered over-educated and not street-ready, given the fact that only privileged children mostly qualified in civil services exams) and for the benefit of the press. Eventually, the case against those arrested would fall apart and they would be released. The communal angle, at least in Lucknow, was not so prominent until the early 80s. Its a shame that the communal angle is now out of proportions even when the unlawful arrests and fake encounters continue unchecked.
Jaipat Singh Jain
Divide the Indian society along religious lines and make the chosen religious community vote for you -- The line of thinking followed by BJP, MIM (Majlis-e-Ittehad-ul Muslimeen), etc.
Divide the Hindu community along caste lines, get the majority caste of the region to vote for you, and forge possible alliance with a few other castes who are not antagonistic to the major caste, besides pretending to pamper the Muslims so that they vote for you as a bloc -- The line of thinking followed by regional casteist parties like SP, BSP, etc.
Use CBI to silence or harass your political opponents or to buy their support, and then happily fish in troubled waters -- The line of thinking followed by Congress
Mulla Mulayam represents the real face of the pro terrorist anti national sick secularism.
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT