The Supreme Court granted bail to eight life convicts in the 2002 Godhra train burning case on Friday due to the length of their sentences (17–18 years) and their individual parts in the crime. Four accused were, however, denied bail owing to their involvement in the case.
On February 27, 2002, some coaches of the Sabarmati Express were set ablaze at the Godhra Railway Station in Gujarat, resulting in the deaths of about 59 persons, including women and children. Massive riots broke out in Gujarat as a result of the occurrence. In 2011, a local court found 31 accused guilty and cleared 63 others.
The high court lowered 11 convicts’ death sentences in the case to life in prison in its October 2017 ruling and affirmed the life sentences imposed on 20 other individuals.
In his argument on behalf of the Gujarat government, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta informed the court, which was presided over by Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud and Justices P.S. Narasimha, that he had some concerns about the bail requests of four accused because of their involvement in the train burning case. The accused have undergone imprisonment for nearly 17 years.
He opposed the release of the four accused asserting that one of them had an iron pipe in his possession, while another had a sickle placed on a pole. He mentioned that the third accused attacked the passengers and stole their belongings while the last one bought, stored and carried the petrol that was used for starting the fire in the coach.
He had previously asserted that it wasn’t just a case of stone-throwing because the inmates had bolted a Sabarmati Express bogie and set it aflame, killing 59 passengers.
On behalf of the petitioners, senior attorney Sanjay Hegde urged that the court postpone the hearing on the four convicts’ bail requests, whose bail was challenged by Tushar Mehta, and give bail to other perpetrators.
He went on to say that he made this request precisely since there is a festival (Eid al-Fitr) on Saturday and he pushed the bench to consider the bail applications of the four accused after two weeks because they would be making statements on their behalf.
A second senior attorney pleaded with the bench not to reject the four accused bail petitions and postpone the hearing on their bail applications.
Tushar Mehta argued that the court should deny the four convicts’ pleas for release, adding that the court may keep the door open for them to resubmit their requests after a year or so.
Following the hearing of submissions, the bench approved bail for eight convicts while rejecting it for another four. “We direct that they be released on bail subject to such terms and conditions as may be imposed by the sessions court,” the bench declared at the conclusion of the hearing for eight petitioners to whom it had granted bail.
The top court had denied bail to two of the convicts on the last hearing date. The commute of 11 convicts’ death sentences to life in prison was challenged by the Gujarat government in a petition to the Supreme Court.
There are currently several appeals against the conviction before the Supreme Court. It had granted bail to one of the accused on December 15 of last year.
The Supreme Court had given the state government notice on the bail requests of Abdul Raheman Dhantia alias Kankatto, Abdul Sattar Ibrahim Gaddi Asla, and others in January of this year.
