MUMBAI: Thirty-one years after a now 55-year-old hawker was accused of being part of a mob involved in rioting and setting ablaze New Bombay Bakery and a house in Bhandup during the 1993 Mumbai communal riots, a sessions court last week acquitted him for lack of evidence. The accused, Harish Chandra Nadar, was arrested on Jan 16 this year and was refused bail.
His lawyer had submitted that he was residing at the same address and his earlier advocate had informed him that the matter is over, hence, he did not appear before the court earlier.
It was the prosecution’s case that on Jan 12, 1993, a police constable was patrolling the area. He learnt that around 10 am, 40- 50 people had gathered to commit rioting and burning. The patrolling cops reached the spot where smoke was seen coming from New Bombay Bakery. A crowd was gathered there. Seeing the cops, they fled. They were chased but could not be caught. A complaint was filed at Bhandup police station.
After completion of investigation, the chargesheet was filed against four accused, including Nadar. Two accused – Anandkumar Nadar and Shashi Tiyar – are still absconding. The trial against a fourth accused was separated. But he too was acquitted in 2001 due to lack of evidence.
To prove guilt of the accused, the prosecution examined only two witnesses. The complainant police constable iterated the contents of complaint and stated that when he reached the spot, he saw the bakery burning.
There were 30-40 persons in the crowd who dispersed on seeing him and the police squad. He chased those persons but they managed to run away.
The second witness of prosecution was a man whose house was burnt in the riot. He stated that his house was in the same premises of the bakery. Due to the communal riots, he said that he had gone to his village. His friend called up to inform him that his house had been burnt in the riot. He came and saw his house burnt and all articles in it were destroyed.
The judge said that from the evidence of both these witnesses, no offence was made out against the accused. “Both these witnesses did not disclose how accused…was implicated in this offence. Hence, it is not proved that accused…was part of the unlawful assembly gathered for rioting and had set fire to the bakery,” the judge said.
His lawyer had submitted that he was residing at the same address and his earlier advocate had informed him that the matter is over, hence, he did not appear before the court earlier.
It was the prosecution’s case that on Jan 12, 1993, a police constable was patrolling the area. He learnt that around 10 am, 40- 50 people had gathered to commit rioting and burning. The patrolling cops reached the spot where smoke was seen coming from New Bombay Bakery. A crowd was gathered there. Seeing the cops, they fled. They were chased but could not be caught. A complaint was filed at Bhandup police station.
After completion of investigation, the chargesheet was filed against four accused, including Nadar. Two accused – Anandkumar Nadar and Shashi Tiyar – are still absconding. The trial against a fourth accused was separated. But he too was acquitted in 2001 due to lack of evidence.
To prove guilt of the accused, the prosecution examined only two witnesses. The complainant police constable iterated the contents of complaint and stated that when he reached the spot, he saw the bakery burning.
There were 30-40 persons in the crowd who dispersed on seeing him and the police squad. He chased those persons but they managed to run away.
The second witness of prosecution was a man whose house was burnt in the riot. He stated that his house was in the same premises of the bakery. Due to the communal riots, he said that he had gone to his village. His friend called up to inform him that his house had been burnt in the riot. He came and saw his house burnt and all articles in it were destroyed.
The judge said that from the evidence of both these witnesses, no offence was made out against the accused. “Both these witnesses did not disclose how accused…was implicated in this offence. Hence, it is not proved that accused…was part of the unlawful assembly gathered for rioting and had set fire to the bakery,” the judge said.
