Ishrat
It was just one man among billions who finally brought justice and peace to the family of Ishrat Jahan Shaikh, killed in a fake encounter on June 14, 2004. His
Mukul Sinha
name — Mukul Sinha. It was 4.30 pm in 2007 when Musarat Jahan, Shamima Jahan and a friend entered advocate Mukul Sinha’s Ahmedabad office. The women were Ishrat Jahan Shaikh’s sister and mother, desperate to get justice for their slain daughter.
Experience talks
“I knew they were coming to see me and I had been briefed about the case. But I was still unprepared for the impact of what they told me. Musarat gave me all the details of the case and I almost immediately knew Ishrat had been murdered. My experience told me it was a fake encounter,” said Sinha, who has spent 32 years in court. That experience came from three specific cases — the Sadiq Jamal case, and the Sohrabuddin Shaikh and Kausarbi cases. All three had been allegedly killed in encounters by the Gujarat police. (See Fake encounter trail).
Similarities
“The more I read up on Ishrat’s case, which had been pending for over three years with the Mumbai High Court, I realised there were startling similarities with the other three encounter deaths in Gujarat. In fact, there were four clear factors that pointed to a fake encounter. (See Sign of four).
Sinha took up the case pro bono because it was a human rights violation case. “I work for the Jan Sangharsh Manch and that is how the Shaikh family approached me,” said the lawyer, who dismissed the largesse immediately. In fact, Sinha is a known name in Gujarat, working with riot victims through the Manch, which brings the poor and lawyers together. “The Maharashtra police is hand-in-glove with the Gujarat police. These fake encounters are conducted with the same ease as flesh trade across the state borders. Police claim lives of innocent people who are tagged as terrorists and are shot point blank without any evidence,” said Sinha.
The lawyer was all praise for Musarat. “Her poor mother could not stop crying for even a moment in the 30 minutes they spent with me. But Musarat held the family together. She was clear-eyed and absolutely calm narrating her sister’s death.”
Sign of four
Sinha’s four factors that pointed to a fake encounter
1) The encounter team was headed by former Gujarat ATS chief DG Vanzara, who had carried out all the encounter killings.
2) All the victims had a Maharashtra connection.
3) All the victims had minor criminal records, except Ishrat.
4) The police claimed that they had come to target and kill Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi.
Fake encounter trail
The fake encounter cases Mukul Sinha has been representing include…
Sadiq Jamal case: On January 13, 2003, Sadiq Jamal (26) was killed in an alleged encounter in the Naroda area of Ahmedabad. The Gujarat police claimed he was a member of Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and was going to kill Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi and Vishwa Hindu Parishad leader Pravin Togadia.
Sohrabuddin Sheikh case: Sohrabuddin was shot dead by the Gujarat police on the outskirts of Ahmedabad on November 26, 2005. The Gujarat and Rajasthan police killed Sheikh in a joint operation. They alleged that he was an LeT outfit member and was on a mission to kill senior BJP leaders, including Modi.
Kausarbi case: On November 27, 2005, the Gujarat police killed Sohrabuddin’s wife Kausarbi, claiming that she was part of the LeT gang, out to kill Modi.
Source: The Mid-Day
Yes, there are very few in Bar and Bench who belive their life is the mission for the protection of human rights vis a vis rule of law in Democracy… Dr. Mukul Sinha is the jewel in the crown.The two hands of law: Right the lawyer and left the police. If both work together in their fields sincerely and diligently like RB Sreekumar Retd.DGP Gujarat State and Dr. Mukul Sinha & team Human Rights Activist… the blessing of almighty is with them to eliminate the Ravans in public and politics and the most organised criminal force in the country -the police. God bless you all.
Proud of you for playing instrumental role in bringing justice.
We need more “Mukul Sinha”s in the society.
thank god we have people like JUCTICE SINHA where saints are hell on earth
Dr. Mukul Sinha & his team are par excellence in professional ethics and etiquettes- to safe guard the rule of law and devoting life for truth and justice. It is time to take up the matter for impeachment of Supreme Court Judges Jefferson ( ex-president of USA ) believed Supreme Court justices who undermine the principles of the Constitution ought to be impeached, and that wasn’t just idle talk. During his presidency, Jefferson led the effort to oust Justice Samuel Chase, arguing that Chase was improperly seizing power. The Senate acquitted Chase in 1805, and no Justice has been impeached since, but as the Supreme Court of India threatens to nullify the Gujarat Pogrom 2002, Jefferson’s idea is worth revisiting. Justice D.K. Jain, in particular, has a well-known affinity for the values of the ” King can do no wrong ” Age. The pattern began with the court’s Banerjee committee: SC refuses to stay Guj HC order
Monday, July 3, 2006, 17:40 [IST]
New Delhi, July 3 : The Supreme Court today refused to stay the order of Gujarat High Court declaring as illegal the appointment of Justice U C Banerjee Committee set up by the Centre to inquire into the Godhra train fire in which 56 Kar sevaks were charred to death on February 27, 2002.
The High Court on March 20 had also restrained the Centre from placing the report before the Parliament for discussion.
A bench comprising Justices K G Balakrishnan and D K Jain, however, isssued notices on the appeal filed by the Centre to the Union Ministry of Home Affairs, Union Law Ministry, Justice Banerjee Commission, Justice Nanavati Commission, State of Gujarat, Nilkanth Tulsidas Bhatia, Chief Commissioner of Railway Safety, Western Region and Commissioner of Railway Safety, Western region.
The Union Government has challenged the High Court order contending that the impugned order was violative of the basic structure of the constitution and is contrary to ‘the doctrine of separation of powers’.
The Centre has also contended that the terms of reference of the Commissions of Inquiry are not overlapping, hence the appointment of the Justice Banerjee Commission by the Centre is not illegal.
The Gujarat government had appointed Justice G T Nanavati, retired judge of Supreme Court, as the chairman of the inquiry commission on May 21, 2002. Nanavati commission was also entrusted with the task of looking into the role of Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi, State bureaucrats and senior police officials during the communal violence which had rocked the state in the aftermath of Godhra incident.
Railway Minister Lalu Prasad, however, appointed Justice U C Banerjee as the chairman of another judicial inquiry commission to inquire into the cause of Godhra train burning incident which led to widespread communal violence in Gujarat in 2002 and left hundreds dead and thousands homeless. Justice U C Banerjee submitted interim report on January 17, 2005.
The appointment of Justice U C Banerjee commission was challenged in the High court.
The Supreme Court was told that the matter is already fixed for final disposal with the High Court and the grant of any interim relief at this stage shall render the petition pending in High Court un fructuous.
UNI
http://news.oneindia.in/2006/07/03/sc-refuses-to-stay-guj-hc-order-declaring-banerjee-committee-illegal-1151928646.html