Beware the Ides of Marh: Serial Bomb Blast 1993 and Riots of 1992-93

The evil that men do lives after them,The good is often entered with their bones.

(Shakespeare)

The renewed demand for the implementation of the recommendations of Justice BN Srikrishna Commission report is not a bolt from the blue, nor is it reopening old wounds. Nor is it a hindsight wisdom following the punishment meted out to the 100 convicted in the serial bomb blasts of March 12, 1993. Or vindictiveness, either. The commission was constituted with only 5 terms of reference:i) The circumstances, events and immediate causes of the incidents which occurred in the Bombay Police Commissionerate area in December 1992 on or after the 6th December 1992 and, again in January 1993, on or after the 6th January 1993;

ii) Whether any individual or group of individuals or any other organization, were responsible for such events and circumstances;

iii) The adequacy or otherwise of the precautionary and preventive measures, taken by the police preceding the aforesaid incidents;

iv) Whether the steps taken by the police in controlling the riots were adequate and proper and whether the police firing resulting in deaths was justified or not; and

v) The measures, long and short term, which are required to be taken by the administration to avoid recurrence of such incidents, to secure communal harmony and also to suggest improvements in law and order machinery. The Government of Maharashtra under Chief Minister of Congress party, Mr Sudhakar Naik, had given the five terms of reference. It lost power to Shiv Sena/BJP in 1995 election. The first ever right wing government of Chief Minister SM Joshi and deputy CM Gopinath Munde expanded the term of reference of inquiry to cover the bomb blasts of March 12, 1993:

vi) The circumstances and the immediate cause of the incidents commonly known as the serial bomb–blasts of the 12th March 1993, which occurred in the Bombay Police Commissionerate area;

vii) Whether the incidents referred to in term (i), have any common link with the incidents referred to in term (vi) above; and

viii) Whether the incidents referred to in term (i) and in term (vi) were part of a common design. There is an interesting see saw of priorities. The Congress government viewd the riots and the massacre very seriously. And the notification of the inquiry Commission was issued on January 25, 1993. . The Shiv Sena/BJP had its mind occupied by the mammoth bomb blasts which had stunned and awed them as well as the whole nation at that time. As they knew the findings of the riots December/January of 1992-93 would be embarrassing they naturally thought of the bomb blasts as revengeful acts against what had happened earlier. They calculated to offset the findings by the inclusion of the horrendous serial blasts in the term of reference. They were aware the (ii) would definitely pin them down, and (iii) and (iv) would expose the role of the police. Hence, the inclusion of (vi)-(viii) was thought of a balancing act and not a heuristic one.

The present groundswell of resentment in the Muslim community vis-à-vis Justice PD Kode judgment seems to be based on the perception that the sequel of (vi)-(viii) has been covered in trial, conviction and sentence. But what about the first bunch (i)-(v), originally proposed one? If the Joshi government had added the second set of term of reference, it surely encompasses the first set. Why has then the investigation and conviction been so tardy in the case of the first? Let alone these there seems to be no proper registration of the crimes which include many where the 31 police men were clearly involved, two of them were deputy commissioner Mr Tyagi and inspector Kapse.

SM Joshi in his interview of August 8, 2007 sounds an ominous threat in the aftermath of the renewed demand for probe into the riots. ”Sad past is best left buried. Communal passions will get inflamed and society will stand exposed to the threat of being torn asunder along religious lines once again, if the Vilasrao Deshmukh government persists in raking up issues pertaining to the Srikrishma Commission report. The then Shive Sena/BJP government had rejected the report, as it was felt that hostilities between religious communities were likely to get further roused by discussing such issues. We continue to maintain the same position now. Of what good is that kind of a justice that complicates issues further and leads to further injustices?”

To deconstruct the remark it would appear that the tactic of retaliation is ever available, including evading justice. The religious passions which saw the bloodshed would have been there again when he was at the helms of the affair if the Commission report was taken up and the same madness would be let loose if the report is implemented now, 2007. Justice BN Srikrishna has found that the attitude of Bal Thackery, Madhukar Saroptdar and Manohar Joshi was responsible for the Sena “vigilantism.” Joshi’s interview is another exercise in intimidation. He also cannot get away by saying that maha aartis were performed because Muslims were also praying on roads on Fridays. That they continue to pray on road is because the floor space is too constricted and Friday prayer does not lead to communal attacks.

But he misses other points, too. After Chief Minister of Bihar Nilesh Kumar reopened the inquiry into Bhagalpur riots of 1989 and got conviction and sentencing to the guilty including a police officer, the resilience of judiciary has acquired the aura of a saving grace for the working democracy that India is. Moreover, the Supreme Court itself has shown keen interest in reopening investigation and trial in many glaring cases of injustice. There is also a change of situation as India is making sincere efforts to get a permanent seat in the United Nations Security Council. We cannot afford to have the nightmare of 1992-93 to haunt us to the corridors of the General Assembly, or the UNSC or the ICC. Executive, judiciary and legislature are the three wings of the government set up. If any one part is not performing well it is but natural that the other parts would provide checks and balances to keep our democracy on steady keel. Therefore inquiry must lead to judiciary hearing and judgment. Establishing facts and acknowledging them will help the society to heal its wounds and reach reconciliation.

But more important than many such factors is the anthropological. More than one thousand Indians had lost their lives in 1893. A full hundred years later the casualties trebled. Is it not too late to wait for the wisdom tooth to cut the gum and make us realize our folly?