2002-03 Mumbai blasts investigation was flawless: Rohini Salian
Mangalore Today News Network
Mar 31, 2016: IN 2015, soon after Rohini Salian alleged that the National Investigation Agency had asked her to go soft on a case in which Hindus were accused and Muslims the victims, a delegation of Muslims came visiting. They were the families of Muslim men who stood accused and the fathers of those who died in the 2008 Malegaon blasts.
She was then the special public prosecutor in the NIA case related to the blasts during Ramzan in which four Muslims were killed and in which Hindu extremists were the accused. After her controversial stand taken on June 2015, Tuesday’s judgment in the 2002-03 serial Mumbai blasts is the first court order she is associated with in her role as a state public prosecutor.
The trial went on for 14 years against 13 accused. As Judge P R Deshmukh pronounced 10 men guilty in the case, Salian stood her ground saying a prosecutor’s job was not to probe the religion of the accused, but to assist the court and the process of justice.
What was your first reponse to the verdict?
There can’t be any happiness in seeing people punished. You can use the word satisfied. However, I am not satisfied for my own self. I was just doing my job. I am satisfied for the victims and for those who deposed as witnesses in this case. I can only say that as a public prosecutor, I have dutifully carried out my responsibilities.
Soon after you spoke out against the undue pressure being put on you by the NIA in the Malegaon case, Muslim organisations came out in your support. Today you have been instrumental in ensuring 10 Muslim men are convicted in a case which many Muslims feel are trumped up charges. How do you deal with this?
I do not work for bouquets or brickbats. At the end of the day I do what my conscience feels is right. I do not look at the accused through the prism of religion. All these accused have during hearings told me that they have faith in me and know that I will be fair. I only work to ensure that justice is delivered.
Many including Saquib Nachan have been let off on charges of conspiring to plan a terrorist act.
The major reason for this has been the judgment in the Parliament attacks case in which the Supreme Court has stated that a statement recorded under Section 32 of POTA is a confessional statement and cannot be used as a substantive piece of evidence against the co-accused. It can only be used against the maker. In this case, there were confessions but we could not use them to tie down all the accused together. There were also cases of witnesses turning hostile. In such cases people work in a very clandestine way. Garnering foolproof evidence is not a very easy task.
How about the quality of investigation? Considering every terror probe is under scrutiny today...
The investigation in this case was flawless. This is the best that the police could have done in the circumstances they were working in. Cracking cases of such conspiratorial nature is not an easy task and requires a lot of diligence. The police has done a good job.
The trial dragged on for close to 13 years. Why did it take so long?
The delay was not from our side. If it was up to me, I would have finished my work in 2004 itself. The defence delayed proceedings and approached higher courts. It could have been avoided. The accused seemed to be happy to not face trial. There was a time when they even wanted a transfer of courts.
Fourteen years on a single case must be very emotionally taxing.
It is a taxing process for sure because you could never be sure as to what issue would crop up the next day. I, however, want to give credit to the accused because they made me study even in this age. I was kept on my toes and had to continuously study. I am, however, used to big trials. I can handle the pressure. My only desire in a trial is that there should not be any bad blood. A trial should flow smoothly. I would like to stick my neck out and say that in spite of the verdict, all the accused would still like me and vouch for my fairness.