Zakia Jafri terms court verdict incomplete

Zakia Jafri, widow of former Congress MP Ahsan Jafri, on Friday said that she is not happy with the judgment in the infamous Gulbarg Society case.

Zakia said it she and not the court that witnessed the mob killing people.

"I am not happy with the judgment. I have seen mob killing people at Gulburg society and not the court. I will continue to fight for justice. I find this judgment incomplete," said Zakia in her reaction after the SIT court delivered its judgment.

She said that the court has acquitted a few accused in the case, which is surprising. "Everyone named in the case had tortured and killed residents of Gulbarg Society. Ones who were acquitted by court had definitely not come to protect us," she said.

Zakia wondered why 11 people were given life imprisonment and some are given just seven or ten years of imprisonment.

However, her son Tanveer has an opposing point of view. He said , "I haven't seen the order yet though our lawyer said that life imprisonment is until death and not 14 years. I am happy with that since I do not believe in the capital punishment."

Former additional solicitor general (ASG) Indira Jaisingh was also disappointed with the quantum of sentencing. "We cannot punish just the hands, those who orchestrated the attack must also be penalised," Jaisingh said. "However, I am satisfied with the life sentence since I am personally not in favour of the death penalty," she added.

Congress spokesperson for Gujarat state, Manish Doshi said people who "played into the hands" of BJP leaders are now behind bars, while the actual culprits are now enjoying the power. "The entire incident of Gulbarg was barbaric and anti-human. Instead of protecting people, the BJP government at that time gave a free hand to (the) violent mob," Doshi said. "The government failed to do its constitutional duty. People were incited by some big leaders of BJP, who saw the violence as a tool to acquire power," he added.

Activist Teesta Setalvad who championed for the rights of the victims of the massacre was disappointed with the final verdict saying, "We wanted exemplary punishment -- life for all."

Setalvad added, "In our submissions to court, we had argued that those convicted under section 436 and 149 that deals with willful arson, also merited a life sentence."

Those closely associated with the case have mixed reactions over the verdict that was 14 years too late. "The judge has agreed the crime to be heinous, though he felt a chance for reformation must be given," said RC Kodekar, counsel for the Special Investigation Team (SIT). "Based on the SIT's recommendation, we will definitely appeal against the lenient sentences and the conspiracy charge which we feel should have been added," Kodekar said.

SIT chairman R K Raghavan, who led the probe in the case also felt that "more people should have been awarded the life sentence." However, Raghavan felt the judgment was t"fair" and "deferred" to the judge's reasoning. "I have no quarrel if the judge felt that the sentences awarded were fair," Raghavan added.