In his first interview after retiring as a Judge from the Bombay High Court, Justice (retired) Pramod Dattaram Kode talks to Vinaya Deshpande about one of the longest trials in the country's criminal history -- the 1993 Mumbai serial bomb blasts case. Over 270 persons were killed and more than 700 injured in a case which was heard for over a decade. 189 accused were charge-sheeted and over 600 witnesses had deposed before the court.
In this candid interview, Justice (retd) Kode speaks for the first time about the Mumbai Police's investigation, then Chief Minister Sharad Pawar's misleading statements to avoid communal flare-up, outburst of Yakub Memon, allegations levelled by the Memon family, and the well-mannered accused Sanjay Dutt.
The honourable retired judge also speaks of the sacred duty of the prosecution, and utters some stern words against Special Public Prosecutor Ujjwal Nikam’s recent comments about cooking up the biryani story to curtail public sympathy for terrorist Ajmal Kasab.
The 1993 serial blasts trial is the longest criminal trial in the country’s history. Over a period spanning more than a decade, you went through 13,000 pages of oral evidence, 7000 pages of documents and 6,700 pages of statements of accused. The charge sheet itself ran into more than 10,000 pages. How did you cope with it?
If you want to do something, you will find ways and means of doing it. During the trial, the judge who hears the evidence has to decide the case, because the impression of evidence on a judge cannot be recorded on paper in all matters.
You have to adopt a method. In this case, the evidence was prepared witness-wise. Then the particular events were linked to particular accused. There were two things that were done simultaneously during the trial. The main work was to record the evidence every day, and then to decide on various applications filed by the accused.
In the beginning, bail was denied to most of the accused…
Yes, in the beginning there was a danger for the society to release the accused on bail. Therefore, bail was denied to them in the beginning.
NCP leader Sharad Pawar, who was then Chief Minister of Maharashtra, went on record in 2006 that he made ‘misleading statements’ about the blasts to avoid communal flare-up. Did his misleading statements reflect on the prosecution’s evidence produced before the court?
No, Mr Pawar’s statement didn’t reflect on the prosecution’s evidence. It was nobody’s case that a place where blast had not taken place was shown as a blast site, or vice versa. Wherever blasts had taken place, ample evidence was produced before the court.
Comments on Mumbai Police, the main investigators of the case…
I give full marks to Mumbai Police, not just for the 1993 blasts investigation, but for reining in the notorious underworld in Mumbai. Earlier, gangsters used to proudly stand before the court and announce which gang they belonged to. They also sought particular prisons based on their gang membership. But their activities were very well-curtailed by the strong steps taken by officers like M N Singh, R D Tyagi, D Sivanandhan, Rakesh Maria, Julio Ribeiro, and many others.
Regarding the 1993 probe, the investigation was above board. The preparation of documentary evidence was excellent. At a time when the image of the country was at stake internationally, the investigators showed that they had taken their job with all seriousness. The probe was carried out not in a routine, mechanical manner, but with a zeal and object to see that such unprecedented acts of terror don’t reoccur in the country. Parallel investigations were being conducted in the blasts case, and the supervising agency took all the pains to see that no unwarranted legal flaws remained in preparing the documentary evidence.
Your dedication towards the trial is well known. You did not take leave even after your parents’ demise, or after you fractured your hand in an accident. What drove you to conduct the trial in such a disciplined manner?
When the trial commenced, it was always at the back of my mind that the perception of Indian judicial system in the western countries needed to be changed. The western world feels that we are primitive. There is a perception that such a big trial is bound to be prolonged, that it cannot be conducted smoothly and finished on time.
It was in my mind that a picture should emerge in the advanced countries, other parts of the world and even within India, that we are much more advanced. That, without bothering about personal sacrifices, workload or other difficulties, we are able to complete the gigantic trial in a peaceful manner, by giving fair opportunity to both the sides, and by ignoring the bias likely to be caused by the devastating effects of the acts of the accused. The blasts had injured over 700 persons, killed more than 270, and had caused damage worth crores of rupees.
After being sentenced to death, accused Yakub Memon is known to have had an outburst in the court. Allegations were also made against the judiciary. The family felt it was wrongly convicted.
He had quite a few outbursts. But anything happening at the time of sentencing has to be ignored because nobody in this world readily accepts punishment. Every culprit, till the last moment, entertains false hope that he may escape from the consequences of the acts committed by him.
Anyway, judicial certificates are not required from the culprits. The apex court is there for giving us certification. Above all, it is also the society, the people of India who give us certification.
If they (Memons) felt they had not done anything wrong, why did they run away from the clutches of law? They flew away. But when they came back, they were given a fair opportunity to defend themselves. Am sure, no bomb blast accused will say he wasn’t given a fair opportunity. Eight of the family members were tried. Those who had no role to play were acquitted. Guilt of others has been established.
Security cover has been provided to you even after retirement now. Do you still face threats?
There is more potential danger. See, at that time, there was a colour given to this case. There was an angle of justification of such acts by the defence. The friends, families of the accused, who have entertained such ideas (about communal justification to the bomb blasts) will always be a threat to persons dealing with the accused in accordance with the law. Even the apex court has ruled that there is nothing wrong in providing such police protection. In fact, if it is not provided, no one will stand up tomorrow to uphold the law of the land.
What was the worst part of the case for you?
It was not just about the deaths and injuries. It was not just about blasts in a particular city named Mumbai. The case was about damage to the nation – in terms of the fear psychosis caused in the minds of the people of the entire nation. The damage did not remain restricted to Mumbai.
The most painful thing for me was that such a loss of that magnitude was caused by culprits who were not foreigners. They were the citizens of this country. It wrenched my heart that nearly 50 years after independence, I had to sentence my own countrymen for entertaining such erroneous ideas which caused huge losses to the nation; that my fellow beings were harbouring such feelings, instead of making an effort for the progress of the country.
The moment when you told Sanjay Dutt, “I have found that you are not a terrorist.”
Sanjay Dutt always maintained decorum in the court. He was most humble before the court. During the course of trial, a section of the media referred to him as a ‘terrorist’. So, he had requested to the court that while deciding on the case, the court should also decide on this aspect, and clarify whether he is a terrorist. He expressed to the court that being labelled a terrorist was a stigma to him and to the family from which he had descended.
After assessing the evidence, no guilt could be proved regarding his involvement in terrorist act, and he was found to be guilty only for offences under the Arms Act. It was thus clarified that he wasn’t a terrorist.
Recently, Special Public Prosecutor Ujjwal Nikam had said he had cooked up the story about 2008 Mumbai terror attack accused Ajmal Kasab demanding mutton biryani, to counter public sympathy towards Kasab. What is your opinion about the officers of the court resorting to such tactics?
It is not the job of the prosecutor to twist the real facts. Officers have to protect the interest of the society, including that of the accused.
