11 get life term in Gulberg society massacre case

June 17, 2016

Ahmedabad, Jun 17: Calling the Gulberg massacre as the "darkest day" in the history of civil society, a special SIT court here today sentenced 11 convicts to life imprisonment in the case of burning alive of 69 people, including former Congress MP Eshan Jafri in the 2002 post-Godhra violence.

Gulberg1

Rejecting the demand for death sentence for all the convicts, the court said life imprisonment for the 11 will be till death if the state does not exercise power to remit the sentence.

The court awarded ten year jail term to one of the 13 convicted for lesser offences while 12 others have been given seven-year sentence each. The prosecution had argued that all the 24 convicts should be given death penalty.

While describing the massacre as the darkest day in the history of civil society, Special court Judge P B Desai refused death penalty saying, "If you look at all aspects, no previous antecedent has been placed on record".

Post the incident, 90 per cent of the accused were released on bail, yet no complaints against them have been given even by victims, and there is no record to show that they committed any offence during the time of bail, the judge further said, while giving reasons why he thought that this was not a fit case to give capital punishment to the convicts.

The court said it has decided to award imprisonment for life without any time frame to 11 accused, who have been convicted for murder, while requesting the state not to use its power to remit the sentence after 14 years of imprisonment.

"CrPC provisions give power to the state to remit sentence after 14 years jail, section 433-A imposes some restriction on that power. In case the state does not exercise power to remit the sentence, life imprisonment will mean that it is till death," the court said.

"I cannot add beyond what has been prescribed under section 302, it is not necessary for a state to exercise power to remit sentence, state may not exercise power of remittance," the judge said, adding the court's direction cannot be binding as he cannot take away the executive powers of the state.

As regards the 13 others accused convicted for lesser offences not including murder (302), the court awarded 10 years imprisonment to one Mangilal Jain, while 12 others were awarded seven-year sentence each.

The Gulberg Society massacre, which took place here on February 28, 2002 when Narendra Modi was the Gujarat Chief Minister, shook the nation when a mob of 400 people set about attacking the society in the heart of Ahmedabad and killed the residents including Jafri.

It was one of the nine cases of the 2002 Gujarat riots probed by the Supreme Court-appointed SIT.

"All the sentences will run concurrently as the Supreme Court has laid it down clearly that if the crime had single purpose, sentences given for different sections of IPC should run concurrently," the court said.

The prosecution and the victims had demanded that sentences awarded to all the accused should not run concurrently as all the 24 convicts will have to spend their entire life behind bars.

Earlier on June 2, the court had convicted 11 persons for murder and other offences, while 13 others, including VHP leader Atul Vaidya, were charged with lesser offences. It had acquitted 36 others in the case.

Those given life sentence in the case are - Kailash Dhobi, Yogendra Shekhawat, Jayesh Jingar, Krishna Kalal, Jayesh Parmar, Raju Tiwari, Bharat Rajput, Dinesh Sharma, Narayan Tank, Lakhansinh Chudasama and Bharat Taili.

One Mangilal Jain, who was convicted for lesser offence, has been sentenced to 10 years jail term.

Besides, VHP leader Atul Vaid, Mukesh Jingar, Prakash Padhiyar, Surendrasinh Chauhan, Dilip Parmar, Babu Marwadi, Manish Jain, Dharmesh Shukla, Kapil Mishra, Suresh Dhobi, Ambesh Jingar and Sandeep Punjabi have been sentenced to seven years imprisonment each.

During the argument on quantum of sentence, special public prosecutor and counsel for Supreme Court-appointed Special Investigation Team (SIT), R C Kodekar had asked the court for nothing less than death sentence or jail term till death for all 24 convicts.

Lawyer for the victims, S M Vora, also sought maximum punishment for the accused and argued that sentencing for each offence should not run concurrently so that they spend their entire life in jail.

However, lawyer of the accused, Abhay Bhardwaj, has refuted the demand of capital punishment or maximum punishment in his arguments saying that the incident was spontaneous and there were enough provocations for it.

The Gulberg society massacre was one of the nine cases of 2002 Gujarat riots probed by the SC-appointed SIT.

The incident had taken place a day after S-6 coach of Sabarmati Express was burnt near Godhra train station in which 58 'kar sevaks' returning from Ayodhya were killed.

During the course of trial, as many as 338 witnesses were cross-examined, with four different judges having presided over the case.

Comments

Ahmed Ali K
 - 
Friday, 17 Jun 2016

Death sentence?
for what?
Is he a non Hindu?

Jaleel S
 - 
Friday, 17 Jun 2016

Rarest of rare judgement...

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
December 16,2025

bengal.jpg

The deletion of over 58 lakh names from West Bengal’s draft electoral rolls following a Special Intensive Revision (SIR) has sparked widespread concern and is likely to deepen political tensions in the poll-bound state.

According to the Election Commission, the revision exercise has identified 24 lakh voters as deceased, 19 lakh as relocated, 12 lakh as missing, and 1.3 lakh as duplicate entries. The draft list, published after the completion of the first phase of SIR, aims to remove errors and duplication from the electoral rolls.

However, the scale of deletions has raised fears that a large number of eligible voters may have been wrongly excluded. The Election Commission has said that individuals whose names are missing can file objections and seek corrections. The final voter list is scheduled to be published in February next year, after which the Assembly election announcement is expected. Notably, the last Special Intensive Revision in Bengal was conducted in 2002.

The development has intensified the political row over the SIR process. Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee and her Trinamool Congress have strongly opposed the exercise, accusing the Centre and the Election Commission of attempting to disenfranchise lakhs of voters ahead of the elections.

Addressing a rally in Krishnanagar earlier this month, Banerjee urged people to protest if their names were removed from the voter list, alleging intimidation during elections and warning of serious consequences if voting rights were taken away.

The BJP, meanwhile, has defended the revision and accused the Trinamool Congress of politicising the issue to protect what it claims is an illegal voter base. Leader of the Opposition Suvendu Adhikari alleged that the ruling party fears losing power due to the removal of deceased, fake, and illegal voters.

The controversy comes amid earlier allegations by the Trinamool Congress that excessive work pressure during the SIR led to the deaths by suicide of some Booth Level Officers (BLOs), for which the party blamed the Election Commission. With the draft list now out, another round of political confrontation appears imminent.

As objections begin to be filed, the focus will be on whether the correction mechanism is accessible, transparent, and timely—critical factors in ensuring that no eligible voter is denied their democratic right ahead of a crucial election.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
December 3,2025

indigo.jpg

IndiGo, India’s largest airline, is battling one of its worst operational disruptions in recent years, with hundreds of delays and cancellations throwing domestic travel into chaos.

Government data on Tuesday showed its on-time performance plunging to 35%, an unusual dip for a carrier long associated with punctuality.

By Wednesday afternoon, airports in Delhi, Mumbai, Bengaluru and Hyderabad had collectively reported close to 200 cancellations, stranding travellers across the country.

Crew Shortage After New Duty Norms

A major trigger behind the meltdown is a severe crew shortage, especially among pilots, following the rollout of revised Flight Duty Time Limitation (FDTL) norms last month.

The rules mandate longer rest hours and more humane rosters — a shift IndiGo has struggled to incorporate across its vast network.

Sources said several flights were grounded due to lack of cabin crew, while some delays stretched upwards of eight hours.

With IndiGo controlling over 60% of India’s domestic aviation market, the ripple effect has impacted airports nationwide.

IndiGo Issues Apology, Lists “Compounding Factors”

In a statement, IndiGo acknowledged the large-scale disruption:

“We sincerely apologise to customers. A series of unforeseen operational challenges — technology glitches, winter schedule changes, adverse weather, system congestion and updated FDTL norms — created a compounding impact that could not have been anticipated.”

To stabilise operations, the airline has begun calibrated schedule adjustments for the next 48 hours, aiming to restore punctuality. Affected passengers are being offered refunds or alternate travel arrangements, IndiGo said.

What the FDTL Rules Require

The FDTL norms, designed to reduce pilot fatigue, cap duty and flying hours as follows:
•    Maximum 8 hours of flying per day
•    35 hours per week
•    125 hours per month
•    1,000 hours per year

Crew must also receive rest equalling twice the flight duration, with a minimum 10-hour rest period in any 24-hour window.

The DGCA introduced these limits to enhance flight safety.

Hyderabad: 33 Flights Cancelled, Long Queues Reported

Hyderabad’s Rajiv Gandhi International Airport saw heavy early-morning crowds as 33 IndiGo flights (arrivals and departures) were cancelled.

The airport clarified on X that operations were normal, advising passengers to contact IndiGo directly for latest flight status.

Cancellations included flights to and from Visakhapatnam, Goa, Ahmedabad, Delhi, Bengaluru, Chennai, Madurai, Hubli, Bhopal and Bhubaneswar.

Bengaluru: 42 Flights Disrupted

Bengaluru’s Kempegowda International Airport recorded 42 cancellations — 22 arrivals and 20 departures — affecting routes to Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai, Hyderabad, Goa, Kolkata and Lucknow.

Passengers Vent on Social Media

Irate travellers took to X to share their experiences. One passenger stranded in Hyderabad wrote: “I have been here since 3 a.m. and missed an important meeting.”

Another said: “My flight was pushed from 1:55 PM to 2:55 PM and now 4:35 PM. I was informed only three minutes before entering the airport.”

Delhi Airport Hit by Tech Glitch

At Delhi Airport, the disruption deepened due to a slowdown in the Amadeus system — used for reservations, check-ins and departure control.

The technical issue led to longer queues and sluggish processing, adding to delays already worsened by staff shortages.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
December 6,2025

pilot.jpg

New Delhi: IndiGo, India’s largest airline, faced major operational turbulence this week after failing to prepare for new pilot-fatigue regulations issued by the Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA). The stricter rules—designed to improve flight safety—took effect in phases through 2024, with the latest implementation on November 1. IndiGo has acknowledged that inadequate roster planning led to widespread cancellations and delays.

Below are the key DGCA rules that affected IndiGo’s operations:

1. Longer Mandatory Weekly Rest

Weekly rest for pilots has been increased from 36 hours to 48 hours.

The government says the extended break is essential to curb cumulative fatigue. This rule remains in force despite the current crisis.

2. Cap on Night Landings

Pilots can now perform only two night landings per week—a steep reduction from the earlier limit of six.

Night hours, defined as midnight to early morning, are considered the least alert period for pilots.

Given the disruptions, this rule has been temporarily relaxed for IndiGo until February 10.

3. Reduced Maximum Night Flight Duty

Flight duty that stretches into the night is now capped at 10 hours.

This measure has also been kept on hold for IndiGo until February 10 to stabilize operations.

4. Weekly Rest Cannot Be Replaced With Personal Leave

Airlines can no longer count a pilot’s personal leave as part of the mandatory 48-hour rest.

Pilots say this closes a loophole that previously reduced actual rest time.

Currently, all airlines are exempt from this rule to normalise travel.

5. Mandatory Fatigue Monitoring

Airlines must submit quarterly fatigue reports along with corrective actions to DGCA.

This system aims to create a transparent fatigue-tracking framework across the industry.

The DGCA has stressed that these rules were crafted to strengthen flight safety and align India with global fatigue-management standards. The temporary relaxations are expected to remain until February 2025, giving IndiGo time to stabilise its schedules and restore normal air travel.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.