[Godhra Train Fire] Interim truth or the first crack in the perennial lie?

Editorial , Combat Law Jan - Feb 2005

Interim truth or the first crack in the perennial lie?

[

1) Interim Report of J. Banerjee Committee
http://www.combatlaw.org/information.php?article_id=537&issue_id=21

2) An Enquiry into the reasons for burning of Coach-6 of the Sabarmati Express Hazards Centre, New Delhi
http://www.combatlaw.org/information.php?article_id=540&issue_id=21

3) Report of DRM "CONFIDENTIAL"REPORT ON THE MISCREANT ACTIVITY AT GODHRA ON FEBRUARY 27, 2002
http://www.combatlaw.org/information.php?article_id=538&issue_id=21

4) Testimonies of witnesses Passenger witnesses before the High Level Committee
http://www.combatlaw.org/information.php?article_id=539&issue_id=21

5) Photographs - Similarity between Coach in Godhra and Coach 16526 in Delhi
http://www.combatlaw.org/information.php?article_id=541&issue_id=21

]


Since the last two years, the official version that the people of India had been told regarding the burning of the S6 coach of the Sabarmati Express on 27th February, 2002 at Godhra was that it was a preplanned "terrorist" attack by Muslims of Godhra to burn alive the VHP Karsevaks who were returning from Ayodhya in the S6 coach on that day. The Justice U.C.Banerjee report is the first authoritative departure from the official line and understandably has evoked a great amount of indignation from the proponents of the "preplanned terrorist attack" theory! The credibility of the U.C.Banerjee report is sought to be questioned on various grounds; the opponents allege that it is politically motivated since it was brought out just before the Bihar elections.

Some question the necessity of appointing the U.C.Banerjee Committee itself since the Nanavati Commission is still functioning and inquiring into the same issue. They also allege that on such issues there cannot be an "interim finding". Some of the leaders of BJP have even gone to the extent of casting aspersions on the character of the Hon'ble retired Judge of the Supreme Court!

Should therefore the U.C.Banerjee report be consigned to the dustbin? That precisely is the objective of the proponents of the "preplanned terrorist attack" theory since the view taken by Justice Banerjee has shaken the very foundation of the two-year-old BJP official line that the burning of the S6 Coach was the result of a "preplanned terrorist attack".

The attempt therefore is to discredit the author of the report with the hope that people would not pay any attention to the content of the report or atleast not give any credence to the report of a discredited Judge. We must therefore avoid this trap. Let us debate on the findings of the U C Banerjee report rather than the alleged motive behind the findings. Public interest therefore demands the publication of the U C Banerjee report such that people can read it for themselves and arrive at their own conclusions! But what are the findings of Justice Banerjee that have led to such sharp reactions from the opponents??

A brief summary may be helpful in appreciating the controversy:

1. That the Railways did not conduct any inquiry into the Godhra incident though it was the statutory obligation on the part of the Commissioner of Railway Safety to make an inquiry as soon as possible. Significantly, the Commissioner of Railway Safety, Western Circle, Mumbai informed the Railway administration by a letter dated 30.10.2002 that it was thought prudent not to conduct the inquiry since the State Government had ordered an inquiry under the Commissions of Inquiry Act. It was noted that inquiry under the Commissions of Inquiry Act was ordered on 6th of March, 2002 i.e. after 8 days of the incident whereas the Commissioner of Railway Safety ought to have conducted the enquiry within 48 hours to collect the evidences immediately. Justice Banerjee therefore held that Railways failure to take steps against the errant official is an act of great indiscretion to the say the least.

2. That the report of Shri B.B. Mogdgil, former Divisional Railway Manger (D R M) of Vadodara dated 28.2.2002 clearly exposed the collusion of certain highly placed railway officials like the DRM himself who helped spread the rumor that the passengers could not alight from the S6 coach because the doors of the said coach was closed from outside! The paragraph 1.10 of the DRM's report contained the shocking assertion: " 1.10: A majority of the passengers of the S-6 coach were unable to alight from the burning coach, primarily due to sever pelting of stones on both side by the mob as well as locking of the exit door from outside." That a top executive of the western railway can resort to such falsehood to help spread the rumor that the karsevaks were burnt to death by locking to the doors from outside is indeed shocking and criminal. It is not only of common knowledge that the doors of any railway compartment cannot be locked by any private person from outside but it is also !
the finding of the FSL that three doors of S-6 were actually open while the coach was burning! This rumor was spread by the vernacular press all over Gujarat to instigate the Hindus against the Muslims during the aftermath of the Godhra incident, which led to the theory of "reaction". On the basis of this part of the report of Justice U.C.Banerjee, Shri Mogdgil should certainly be prosecuted and punished.

3. That the S-7 coach which was adjacent to the ill-fated S-6 coach, was partially damaged but mysteriously, not detached from the train at Godhra along with the S-6 and S-5 coaches. Later on, in the conspiracy theory developed by the Gujarat police, the S-7 coach was brought into prime focus when it was alleged that the "Muslim conspirators had entered the S-6 coach by a cut they had allegedly made in the canvas covering of the vestibule of the S-7 coach and thereafter poured 60 liters of petrol inside S-6.." An obvious question would be know whether the canvas was examined for finding out the alleged "cut" made therein! Justice Banerjee's report has brought out yet another shocking revelation in this regard. He has discovered that the said piece of canvas has been sold off as a piece of scrap and is lost forever! The Gujarat Police story thus is woven around a non-existent piece of evidence! 4. Lastly, after examining several witnesses and voluminous documentary evidence,!
the Banerjee report concludes that on the basis of the evidence available at this stage, the "Petrol theory" or even the "miscreant theory" are totally absurd and the fire in the S-6 coach was essentially an accidental fire.

The conclusions of Justice Banerjee, though styled as " interim findings" are well reasoned and supported by credible evidence on record. From the evidence on record, it does not appear that the further collection of evidence would lead to any fundamental contradiction with the present findings. The further evidencing would perhaps give further corroboration of the present findings. What however is most important that the people of India have been for the first furnished with cogent and well-reasoned findings of the Godhra incident. Till now all we had were wild allegations by the politicians to instigate one community against another. Atleast people will now stop believing in reports of officers like Mogdgil who misuse their high position to mislead the people!.

Editors