Best Bakery Case

Zahira Habibullah Sheikh v. State of Gujarat

BEST BAKERY CASE

• Decided On: 12.04.2004• Appellants: Zahira Habibulla H. Sheikh and

Anr.Respondent: State of Gujarat and Ors.

• Hon'ble Judges: Doraiswamy Raju and Arijit Pasayat, JJ.

• Subject: Criminal

BEST BAKERY CASE• March 1, 2002 Communal frenzy envelops Vadodara and 14 people

are killed in Best Bakery in the Hanuman Tekri locality. Zaheera Sheikh loses nine family members, emerges as the star witness.

• March 2, 2002

Zaheera files an FIR and names the accused. Describes how the mob came towards the house shouting “kill the Muslims, burn the bakery”.

BEST BAKERY CASE

• May 17, 2003

In a dramatic turnaround, Zaheera turns hostile. She claims she did not see anything because “a mob of 1,500 persons had come and they were hiding in fear”.

• June 27, 2003

The fast-track Vadodara court acquits all the 21 accused

BEST BAKERY CASE

• "the lack of government commitment to ensuring justice to victims of the communal violence in Gujarat.”

AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL

• "miscarriage of justice" NATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

"no confidence" in the Gujarat government.V.N KHARE,CHIEF JUSTICE OF SUPREME COURT

"It was proved beyond doubt that a violent mob had attacked the bakery and killed 12 persons. However, there was no legally acceptable evidence to prove that any of the accused presented before the court had committed the crime."

ABHAY THIPSE j

BEST BAKERY CASE

• July 7, 2003

The Citizens for Justice and Peace headed by Teesta Setalvad holds a press conference for Zaheera in Mumbai.

• July 11, 2003

Zaheera testifies before a full bench of the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) saying she was forced to retract her statements.

BEST BAKERY CASE

• August 1, 2003

The NHRC files a Special Leave Petition in the Supreme Court (SC). Asks for a retrial in a court outside Gujarat

• September 8, 2003

In her affidavit to the SC, Zaheera says she turned hostile because Chandrakant Batthoo, Madhu Srivastava’s cousin, threatened to kill the remaining four of her family.

BEST BAKERY CASE

• April 12, 2004

The SC orders a retrial of the Best Bakery case in Maharashtra.

• November 3, 2004

In yet another stunning volte-face, Zaheera turns hostile again and tells the Vadodara collector that she was being pressured and threatened by Teesta Setalvad.

BEST BAKERY CASE

• December 6, 2004

The SC asks Zaheera whether her disclosure amounted to her having filed a false affidavit to the apex court. Wants to know by January whether it amounts to contempt of court.

• January 1, 2005

Tehelka stings Vadodara MLA Madhu Srivastava and his cousin Batthoo saying they paid her Rs 18 lakh to change her testimony

ZAHEERATEESTA

BEST BAKERY CASE. • January 10, 2005

The SC directs Registrar General BM Gupta to conduct a probe into the basis of Zaheera’s statements and the affidavits filed by Setalvad in the apex court

• August 24, 2005

The SC committee submits its report, calling Zaheera a “self-condemned liar” who had fallen to inducements to give inconsistent statements. It gives a clean chit to Setalvad

BEST BAKERY CASE

.• February 24, 2006

A Mumbai sessions court convicts and gives life imprisonment to nine of the 17 accused facing trial. It also issues notices to Zaheera and her family for tendering false evidence.

RELAVANCE OF THE CASE

Witnesses are the eyes and ears of justice. BENTHAM

HOSTILE WITNESS

HOSTILE WITNESS Is not desirous of teeling the truth Gained over by the opposite party

• A witness’s primary allegiance is to the truth and not to the party calling him.

Unfavourable testimony doesnot declare a witness hostile

Effect of the testimony of hostile witness

• EARLIER POSITIONTestimony is completely rejected

• PRESENT POSITIONNot completely rejectedAccept the part of it which the judge finds as

creditworthy

The issue is..

• Why do the witness turn hostile

which lead to the acquittal in heinous crimes???

• What can be done

to eradicate this malaise???

Why the witness turn hostile??

• threats, • coercion, • lures and monetary considerations at the instance of those in power, their

henchmen and hirelings, political clouts and patronage and innumerable other corrupt practices

Why witness turn hostile?

• Delay in trials by adjournments • fear of harassment by the police

The state has an important role in protecting the witness

THE COURT MUST….

the Presiding Judge must • cease

to be a spectator and a mere recording machine

• a participant in the trial• evincing intelligence • active interest and • elicit all relevant materials

TWO ASPECTS OF WITNESS PROTECTION

• evidence of witnesses that has already been recorded during the investigation is not allowed to be destroyed by witness

• physical and mental vulnerability of the witness and to the taking care of his or her welfare

RECCOMENDATIONS OF LAW COMMISSION

• procedure for granting anonymity to witness and also

• introducing Witness Protection Programmes as well in which personal protection is granted to the witness

LEGISLATIVE MEASURES

• Section 195 A of Indian Penal Code

Threatening to give false evidence• Imprisonment upto 7 years , fine or both

If an innocent is convicted• The same punishment as the innocent

punished

I CONCLUDE….

"Padodharmasya Kartaram Padah sakshinomruchhati Padah sabhasadah

sarban pado rajanmruchhati“ (In the adharma flowing from wrong decision in

a Court of law, one fourth each is attributed to the person committing the adharma, witness, the judges and the ruler".)

MANUSMRITI