The Nanavati Commission’s conspiracy theory has its basis in the alleged abduction of one Sophia from Godhra railway station and the alleged rumours spread by Salim Panwala about a Muslim girl’s abduction.
According to statements given by Sophia — who was 17 at the time of the incident — to both police and the Commission, there was a scuffle between some Muslim vendors and karsevaks at the railway station, as one of the karsevaks tried to forcibly take her towards the Sabarmati Express. She was released after her mother raised an alarm.
Sophia had said this in her first statement to the police on March 28, 2002. In police chargesheets, she was cited as a witness. She was called by the Commission to give evidence on January 13, 2003. The crux of Sophia’s statement -- both to the police and the Commission — has remained unchallenged by all parties present.
However, not only does the Nanavati Commission reject her statements, it also draws new inferences from it. “The Commission is inclined to take the view that such an incident had, in fact, not happened and probably what Sophiabanu has stated was at the insistence of Salim Panwala who had spread a false rumour. It appears to be an attempt to pass off the false rumour as true,” the Commission says. This conclusion is important in the context of the conspiracy theory, as it suggests that there was a plan to set the train on fire and a rumour regarding the abduction of a Muslim girl was spread to mobilise a mob near the train.
The conspiracy theory would have suffered if the mob had spontaneously reacted to an attempt to abduct a Muslim girl — a version that had found official endorsement in police reports.
While the first chargesheet of the case does not mention Panwala and Sophia, they figure in all the 16 supplementary chargesheets filed later. All the supplementary chargesheets mention the incident involving Sophia and say that Panwala had raised an alarm about the abduction of a Muslim girl. These two incidents are, however, mentioned independent of each other.
In the first part of its report, the Commission has said that Panwala was at a distance from the place where Sophia’s attempted abduction took place and had raised a false alarm to gather a mob around the train.
The Commission has mentioned the delay on the part of Sophia to tell others about the incident and the fact that she and her mother had not boarded the train to Vadodara on February 27 after the incident. The report says, “If they had really gone to the station for going to Vadodara, they would have boarded the Sabarmati Express as it would have taken them to Vadodara, but they did not do so.”
The report concludes that “if what Salim Panwala had said was true, then an attempt would have been made to look for her while the train was standing on the station for eight to 10 minutes thereafter. But no body did that.”
Incidentally, there is no material on record to suggest whether somebody had actually gone looking for Sophia or not, or whether any witnesses had been asked this specific question. Neither was Sophia’s version ever disputed. Besides, the state Government also never took the stand that the versions of Sophia and Panwala were connected.
Courtesy : www.indianexpress.com
According to statements given by Sophia — who was 17 at the time of the incident — to both police and the Commission, there was a scuffle between some Muslim vendors and karsevaks at the railway station, as one of the karsevaks tried to forcibly take her towards the Sabarmati Express. She was released after her mother raised an alarm.
Sophia had said this in her first statement to the police on March 28, 2002. In police chargesheets, she was cited as a witness. She was called by the Commission to give evidence on January 13, 2003. The crux of Sophia’s statement -- both to the police and the Commission — has remained unchallenged by all parties present.
However, not only does the Nanavati Commission reject her statements, it also draws new inferences from it. “The Commission is inclined to take the view that such an incident had, in fact, not happened and probably what Sophiabanu has stated was at the insistence of Salim Panwala who had spread a false rumour. It appears to be an attempt to pass off the false rumour as true,” the Commission says. This conclusion is important in the context of the conspiracy theory, as it suggests that there was a plan to set the train on fire and a rumour regarding the abduction of a Muslim girl was spread to mobilise a mob near the train.
The conspiracy theory would have suffered if the mob had spontaneously reacted to an attempt to abduct a Muslim girl — a version that had found official endorsement in police reports.
While the first chargesheet of the case does not mention Panwala and Sophia, they figure in all the 16 supplementary chargesheets filed later. All the supplementary chargesheets mention the incident involving Sophia and say that Panwala had raised an alarm about the abduction of a Muslim girl. These two incidents are, however, mentioned independent of each other.
In the first part of its report, the Commission has said that Panwala was at a distance from the place where Sophia’s attempted abduction took place and had raised a false alarm to gather a mob around the train.
The Commission has mentioned the delay on the part of Sophia to tell others about the incident and the fact that she and her mother had not boarded the train to Vadodara on February 27 after the incident. The report says, “If they had really gone to the station for going to Vadodara, they would have boarded the Sabarmati Express as it would have taken them to Vadodara, but they did not do so.”
The report concludes that “if what Salim Panwala had said was true, then an attempt would have been made to look for her while the train was standing on the station for eight to 10 minutes thereafter. But no body did that.”
Incidentally, there is no material on record to suggest whether somebody had actually gone looking for Sophia or not, or whether any witnesses had been asked this specific question. Neither was Sophia’s version ever disputed. Besides, the state Government also never took the stand that the versions of Sophia and Panwala were connected.
Courtesy : www.indianexpress.com