By A Mirsab, TwoCircles.net,
Kolkata: As the NIA’s investigation into the Burdwan blast is progressing swiftly with number of arrest from West Bengal and Bangladesh, it is leaving behind some legal loopholes in the case raising questions over the credibility of the investigation.
Amidst the reports of discrepancies found in the NIA’s investigation, Rihai Manch, an NGO working for the release of innocent Muslims imprisoned in the name of terrorism, has demanded an independent investigation into the Burdwan blast by a sitting Supreme Court judge.
The news of ambiguity in NIA’s probe came to the fore at a time when Burdwan blast has become the centre stage in the political feud between BJP and TMC.
Weekly news magazine Outlook India, in its investigative piece as part of a cover story in the latest issue, has raised some vital questions over NIA’s investigation. These questions can have legal implications before the court of law and might even fail NIA’s case before the court to some extent.
The NIA claimed that Karim Shaikh was one of the five people inside an apartment in Khagragarh, a largely Muslim dominated locality of Burdwan town, where a bomb went off on October 2. There was one of the youth, who was critically injured, and died after couple hours in hospital. Forty days later, the NIA said he was Karim Shaikh.
The NIA did not follow proper procedure in ascertaining the actual identity of the deceased and declared him to be Karim Shaikh and announced that his father Jamshed Shaikh identified his body.
A part of Outlook India’s investigative piece on the controversy in the NIA probe is reproduced below:
Jamshed says NIA officials pushed him into accepting it. According to him, his son Karim left home two months before the blast to find work as a construction labourer in Kerala. He had not called or written home since. “NIA officials came to my house and showed me a picture of my dead son on a cell phone,” Jamshed says. When he said he could not identify the body from the photo on the cell phone, they coerced him into doing their bidding. They say the grainy photo on the cell phone showed the head and upper torso of a youth, upwards from a little below the nipples. The youth in the photo did not appear to have any wounds. But, say Jamshed and his nephew Amirul, who accompanied him to the morgue, the body that was handed over to them had its chest and face partly blown, as from an explosion.
In addition to this major discrepancy, what bothered them was they could not have in any way identified the body they were shown, blast-marked as it seemed.
Finding the loop hole in NIA’s probe, the magazine reports the first reports of the explosion had said the youth had identified himself as Swapan Mandal, which would mean he was a Hindu. But police subsequently said the youth had also called himself Suvan or Subhan Mandal, suggesting he might have been a Muslim. Of course, Karim Sheikh was decidedly Muslim. Clearly, given this ambiguity, the NIA should have made sure that his identity was established beyond doubt.
Perhaps the most startling testimony is of a man named Parvez Khan, who claims to be a police informer and lives in Khagragarh, less than half a kilometre from the crime scene. He claims he was the first to enter the blast scene with local police officers and had taken the wounded Swapan/ Subhan/ Karim to the hospital. “It was to me he first said his name was Swapan Mandal and then Subhan Mandal,” says Khan. “He gave the name of his village as Nairodigi.”
Once at the hospital, Khan tied the feet and hands of Swapan/ Subhan/ Karim to the bed posts on the doctors’ instructions. “His face was covered in blood; his right eye was blown off completely and there was a gaping wound in his chest,” says Khan. Shown the photograph the NIA had showed to Jamshed, Khan said the body in the picture did not have the wounds he had seen on the body he had taken to the hospital. Willing to give his testimony, he claims the police have actually told him to lie low. Khan also insists the critically wounded man was uncircumcised. Karim had been circumcised as a child.
In short, following are substantial questions over NIA’s investigation:
1. Why did the NIA write that Jamshed had identified the body when he hadn’t?
2. Why did the NIA show Jamshed a cell phone picture and not hard copies taken by an official police photographer?
3. What is the legal validity of a cell phone picture?
4. Why was Jamshed shown only one picture? And if Jamshed did not identify the body, why did the NIA not call for a DNA test?
5. When Karim was a Muslim, who was circumcised as a child, then why was the body claimed to be of Karim’s was uncircumcised?
The two storied house where the ‘accidental’ explosion occurred on October 2.
Rihai Manch demands independent probe by sitting SC judge
Citing the political war over Burdwan blast and the revelation by Outlook India magazine, Rihai Manch – Forum for the Release of Innocent Muslims imprisoned in the name of Terrorism – on Sunday demanded independent investigation into the blast probe by a sitting Supreme Court judge.
It has also called for investigation on the part of NIA, IB director Asif Ibrahim, NSA Ajit Doval and NIA DG Sharad Kumar.
Rihai Manch president Muhammad Shua said, “It becomes a matter of concern when chief minister of a state (Mamta Banerjee) raises doubt over the role of RSS and the Central government in Burdwan blast as it was earlier found that right wing activists had indeed triggered blasts across the country.”
Rajeev Yadav, a leader of Rihai Manch said, “Under the new revelations, it is likely that the NIA had falsely uncovered a plot to assassinate Bangladesh PM Sheikh Hasina and stage a coup thereby to find Bangladesh support in its investigation so as to increase the credibility of its investigation.”
A leader from Nagrik Parishad, Ramkrishna said, “The kind of environment that is being created against Muslims due to the investigation of NIA that it-self is being criticized under the new revelation. It is now necessary that the case be investigated independently by a Supreme Court judge.”
“Ajit Doval (the NSA in Modi government) is already known for his proximity with Sangh and was earlier reported of saving an IB officer Rajendra Kumar, who was nearly booked for his role in the ill famous Ishrat Jahan encounter case”, he added.
Politics on Burdwan blast
No sooner the blast occurred on October 2, there was a BJP rally demanding handing over of the probe to the NIA. West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee accused the Centre of ‘meddling’ in the state affairs but the Centre handed over the investigation to the NIA.
Subsequently on October 23, the NIA claimed terror modules linked to Jamaat-ul-Mujahideen (JMB), Bangladesh and immediately started arresting people in the case. Hysterical revelation came from the NIA on October 28 that uncovered a plot to assassinate Bangladesh PM Sheikh Hasina and staged a coup.
When the investigation was progressing with a good pace, the BJP accused the ruling party TMC and its chief Mamata Banerjee of nurturing terrorism by going soft on terror activities in West Bengal. On November 23, Banerjee accused the Central government for Burdwan blast saying, “They (Centre) first said illegal immigrants should be thrown out. Now the Burdwan incident seems a little bit related. When did the man rent the house at Khagragarh? In July. After the Modi government came to power. You let them in, found them a house, allowed them to make explosives and tried to start a riot during the Pujas.”
On the other hand, BJP national president Amit Shah who was in West Bengal on Sunday for a planned grand rally, used Burdwan blast linking it with Saradha chit fund case to ridicule and blame the TMC.
“Saradha chit fund money was used in the Burdwan blast,” said Shah, and added, “Bengal needs a government which is patriotic, which doesn’t save the culprits of the Burdwan blast, which does not indulge in corruption.”
Related: