The Kashmir Monitor
By Ajai Sahni
Given a succession of judgments in cases of Hindutva terrorism, the Samjhauta Express judgment could surprise only the incurably naïve. At present, it’s not possible to evaluate the evidence at hand, but there is ample cumulative reason to believe that institutions and processes are being subverted in cases where partisan and ideological considerations connected to the present regime are involved. The prosecutorial U-turns and outcomes of the Malegaon and Ajmer Sharif blast cases, the fact that RohiniSalian, the public prosecutor in the Malegaon case, openly said that she had been pressurised to “go easy” on the accused and a Haryana Police investigator’s public assertion that the prosecution sought to bury the truth in the Samjhauta Express trial, are cases in point.
It is significant, again, that a division bench of the Bombay High Court, in the cases of the killing of ‘rationalists’ NarendraDabholkar and GovindPansare by alleged Hindutva extremists, has repeatedly excoriated the investigating agencies and noted on March 14, 2019, “The same old story is repeated and we are sorry to say, it’s nothing but an eyewash. By the methodology adopted, the absconding accused are not going to be arrested and for years together.”
Significantly, even as the judgment on the Samjhauta Express case became public and the National Investigation Agency (NIA) clarified that the question of appeal to a higher court would be addressed only after studying its text, the Minister of Home Affairs immediately announced that there would be no appeal and no new inquiry-making it abundantly clear that the decision was political, not connected to any revaluation of the evidence or the content of the judgment and that NIA was not consulted. Crucially, where the state routinely takes the most trivial cases through the appeals process, this case, involving the death of 68 persons and injuries to at least another 50, seems to merit neither appeal nor-given the acquittal of all the accused-any new investigation. Are we then to believe that no one was responsible for this heinous crime?
The Hindutva propaganda factory has claimed that all these cases are a conspiracy to defame their cause, that there is no such thing as Hindutva or saffron terror, but let it be abundantly clear: Hindutva terror is a reality. Since 2002, at least 23 incidents have been reported, in 10 of which 133 persons were killed; in another eight, 69 were injured. Some of these cases (including those in which the accused have been acquitted) may be disputed, but there are four incidents in which Hindu extremists allegedly linked to the Bajrang Dal and (separately) the SanatanSanstha, have blown themselves up while manufacturing or transporting bombs-there can be little doubt at least about these. It is useful to recall that a similar accidental explosion at Burdwan in West Bengal sent the NIA on a nationwide rampage to uncover Islamist terrorist networks; but such blasts involving Hindutva cadres have failed to excite any comparable enthusiasm for wider investigation.
It takes a special genius to destroy a case in which the prime accused has twice confessed, in great detail, before a magistrate and also willingly given a boastful interview to a journalist detailing his actions, motives and connections (the NIA has not even called for this last source of evidence).
There is little difference between the NIA’s persistent failure to find evidence against Hindutva terrorists and Pakistani investigators who can’t find “credible evidence” against the 26/11 perpetrators and other Islamist terrorists acting openly against India. The collapse of the prosecution in a succession of Hindutva terrorism cases can only diminish India’s credibility and bring disgrace to the country’s ‘premier’ counter-terrorism investigation agency. Worse, it will immensely encourage fringe Hindutva elements who see mass murder as a legitimate instrument in their war against other communities as well as against Hindus who do not accept the dogmas these extremists invent along the way in their grab for political power.
