The attack was a retaliatory action for the Godhra carnage, said special court.
Delivering the much-awaited verdict in the Sardarpura riots case, the special court has declined the conspiracy theory behind the attack and has held that the act was reaction of the Godhra carnage case.
The prosecution as well as the advocates for the witnesses had argued that the attack on the house was much planned in advance. They had argued that the attack was planned much in advance and the villagers had made preparations with that effect as well.
Most of the convicts were farmers and some youth in their late teens. The list of the convict also included the then sarpanch of the village Kanu Joyta Patel and former sarpanch Kachara Patel. Two accused, Ambalal Patel and Mathur Patel had links with a saffron party.
While convicting 31 accused, the court acquitted 42 others. While acquitting them the court said out of the 42, there was no evidence against 11 and others were given benefit of doubt. The special public prosecutor said the accused had been let of as the witnesses had failed to identify them in the court. The acquitted were allowed to go home after furnishing the amount of bond.
The court has convicted all the accused for murder along with the charges of damaging houses, criminal trespass, attacking with dangerous weapons and causing grievous hurt to people. Though no significant role was attributed to any of the accused, they accused of being a part of an unlawful assembly which attacked the house and killed 31 innocent persons. The court has, while awarding punishment to the accused, also asked them to pay Rs50,000 each towards compensation to the victims of the case.
While arguing for the quantum of punishment the special public prosecutor had said this is a heinous crime and the accused be awarded the maximum punishment.
“Children and women were killed when they were hiding in a house to protect themselves from the furious mob. They had nothing to defend them and thus met with unfortunate fate. In such a case, the court should award maximum punishment to set an example,” Shah had argued.
While the advocate for witnesses, Yusuf Shaikh demanded for deterrent punishment to set a bench to curb the “virus” of communal clashes in the state.
However, the advocate for the accused sought for mercy as the most of the accused had family to look after and many of them were still in the prime of their youth.
They sought for minimum punishment of life.
Rejecting the demand of the special public prosecutor for capital punishment, the special court awarded life imprisonment to all the 31 convicts of the case.
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}