To prove it the prosecution examined twenty two witness es which were grouped by the trial judge in seven.
259 64 of 1987.
3 of 1985 with Terrorist Criminal Case Nos.
13 of 1985 and 6 of 1986.
From the Judgment and Order dated 20.4.
S. Poti, M.N. Shroff, Anip Sachthey, Bimal Roy, Kai lash Vasdev, Ms. A. Subhashini, Chava Badri Nath Babu, Girish Chandra, Biman Jad and Ashish Verma for the Respond ents.
Maniben, a dabgar, whose one of the daughters had married a muslim but was having strained relations with him, companytinued to live in her house either because she had numberother place to go or she was companyfident that she shall number be harmed.
U. Mehta, A.S, Quereshi, Salman Khurshid, S.H. Kureshi, Mrs. Vimla Sinha, Ifshad Ahmed, Imtiaz Ahmed, Gopal Singh and S.M. Qureshi for the Appellants.
What a tragedy?
Even ladies attempted to prevent fire brigade from extinguishing fire.
Five in waiting for gal lows.
These were the witnesses who were said to have companylected at the house of Ambalal from where they witnessed the occurrence and the participation of the appellants in it.
1987 of the Designated Court, Ahmedabad in Terrorist Criminal Case No.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE.JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal Nos.
Neighbours residing peacefully for generations sharing companymon happiness and sorrow even playing cricket together suddenly went mad.
Blood thirsty for each other.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by M. SAHAI, J. Tragic trauma of ghastly, in human and beastly behaviour of one companymunity against another depicted for weeks and weeks, in this criminal appeal, forcefully, at times, emotionally still hangs heavily.
One and the main group companysisted of Navin PW 1, Ambalal PW 8, Rati lal PW 9, and Kalidas PW 13.
Burning, looting and killing became order of the day.
Eight human lives roasted alive.
Howev er despite stationing of military incidents went on whenever or wherever least opportunity was available with the result that curfew was clamped, companytinuously, in the area from 7th June, 1985.
