FRONT PAGE | Sunday, December 28, 2008 | Email | Print | 
63 sentenced for Marad massacre
A special court here, on Saturday, convicted 63 of the total 139 accused in the case relating to the massacre in Marad, a fishing hamlet in Kozhikode district of Kerala, on the night of May 2, 2003, in which eight Hindus were chopped and hacked to death. The court acquitted the remaining 76 accused on the ground that the prosecution failed to establish the case against them. The punishments for the convicted would be announced after the trial on sentence for which the court would sit on Monday.
Sixty-two of the total 63 accused were found guilty under various charges, mainly Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for homicide, 307 for attempt to homicide, unlawful assembly, causing riots under Sections 147, 148 and 149, inflicting injury using weapons, causing riots by inciting religious hatred, etc. Accused number 139, Latheef, who was the secretary of Marad Mosque committee during the time of incident, was found guilty of misusing places of worship under the Religious Institutions Misuse (Prevention) Act.
However, Special Judge Babu Mathew P Joseph said the prosecution failed to prove the most cardinal allegation about conspiracy behind the massacre under Section 120 (B) of the IPC. The prosecution's allegations against the accused under the Explosives Act and the Arms Act also were found insufficient. The prosecution had charged cases under 47 sections of the Indian Penal Code against the accused.
The State police's Crime Branch had at the end of a three-month probe into the massacre, which pushed Marad and adjoining areas into the whirlpool of panic and perpetual communal tension, listed 150 people as accused and the final list contained 139 accused. While the prosecution expressed satisfaction in the judgement, counsels of the accused said the prosecution had failed in proving the case and the convicted persons would approach the High Court with appeals.
A Muslim named Asghar Ali was also killed in the incident of May 2, 2003 night, but he was arrayed as an accused as he had been among the group of the killers. Two of the accused had during the trial period escaped to overseas and a case against the police was on regarding how they had got passports.
Defendants’ lawyer Sameer said the prosecution had not been able to prove the conspiracy behind the massacre and "this itself was our point". "The judgement proves that the Judiciary had seen the May 2, 2003 incident as a response to Marad One," he said. Riots had taken place in Marad on January 3 and 4, 2002 in which five persons were killed.
Legal experts said that the judgement reflected a possible thinking of the court that the massacre in 2003 was a direct result of Marad One riots. First and seventh accused in the case were TP Muhammadali (46) and Bijili (26), brother and son respectively of Aboobacker Thekkeppurath, who was killed in the Marad One riots. The prosecution had alleged that Muhammadali and Muhammad Koya, 141st accused, had planned revenge for this.
Experts also pointed out that the Crime Branch had not looked into the aspect of larger conspiracy involving political parties, mobilisation of funds and weapons and role of foreign assistance in the massacre but only into the possible conspiracy behind the incident as a direct response to Marad One killings.
The judicial commission which probed the 2003 massacre had recommended high-level probe by a Central agency into the larger conspiracy aspect. The LDF Government had now written a letter to the Centre regarding this.
The BJP said that the UDF, which was in power when the massacre took place, and the LDF Government, which followed it, had refused to consider the demand for a CBI probe into this aspect. While former State BJP president PS Sreedharan Pillai said the judgment on Saturday had delivered only partial justice, the Muslim League leadership responded cautiously saying not even a single innocent should be punished.
In the process of the case, the court had examined 5,500 pages of depositions by witnesses. Altogether there were 222 witnesses from the prosecution side and seven for the defendants. The court had examined seven witnesses it had found on its own. It had also examined 778 exhibits submitted by the prosecution and 57 exhibits produced by the defense counsels.
The verdict was to be announced on November 29 as per the original schedule but the judge had to postpone it as he needed more time to complete the procedures due to loss of some workdays.
Email | Print | Rate:
|