- News>
- India
Discrepancies in Best Bakery witnesses` statements: Police
Vadodara, Oct 12: Claiming that the key witness Zahira and her family members had made different statements in the court in the Best Bakery case, city police today said sorting out discrepancies in their statements was necessary before taking any action.
Vadodara, Oct 12: Claiming that the key witness Zahira and her family members had made different statements in the court in the Best Bakery case, city police today said sorting out discrepancies in their statements was necessary before taking any action.
Zahira Shaikh, her brother Nafitullah, sister Sahera and sister-in-law Yasminbanu have made four different statements, making job of securitymen difficult, police said here.
After a statement by Nafitullah, the local detective, crime branch registered an offence against BJP MLA Madhu Srivastav, Congress corporator Chandrakant Srivastav alias Bathhu, Rehmuttlah, Lal Mohammed and an unidentified person.
Nafitullah had alleged that these persons had threatened to eliminate him and his family if Zahira and her family members testified against the accused in the case during its trial and they were also asked to refrain from making any statement, following which Zahira retracted her statement.
While Nafitullah alleged that Madhu Srivastav had issued threatened him in premises owned by his cousin Chandrakant, Zahira, in her statement before the Supreme Court, stated that her brother received threats on phone.
However, Sahera and Yasminbanu denied receiving any threats to the family. Twenty-one persons were acquitted in the case by the fast-track court, leading to widespread protests and demands for re-trial, prompting the Supreme Court to pass strictures against the Gujarat government.
The state government later assured the apex court that it would do its best to bring the guilty to book. Bureau Report
After a statement by Nafitullah, the local detective, crime branch registered an offence against BJP MLA Madhu Srivastav, Congress corporator Chandrakant Srivastav alias Bathhu, Rehmuttlah, Lal Mohammed and an unidentified person.
Nafitullah had alleged that these persons had threatened to eliminate him and his family if Zahira and her family members testified against the accused in the case during its trial and they were also asked to refrain from making any statement, following which Zahira retracted her statement.
While Nafitullah alleged that Madhu Srivastav had issued threatened him in premises owned by his cousin Chandrakant, Zahira, in her statement before the Supreme Court, stated that her brother received threats on phone.
However, Sahera and Yasminbanu denied receiving any threats to the family. Twenty-one persons were acquitted in the case by the fast-track court, leading to widespread protests and demands for re-trial, prompting the Supreme Court to pass strictures against the Gujarat government.
The state government later assured the apex court that it would do its best to bring the guilty to book. Bureau Report