Bail Granted, Life Sentence suspended for BJP Leader Nityananda Mahato & Ors: HC, Alimuddin Ansari Lynching

Written by SabrangIndia Staff | Published on: July 2, 2018

 
Courtesy: The Quint

On the first anniversary of the gruesome lynching of Alimuddin Ansari, the Jharkhand HC suspended the life sentence of BJP leader, Nityananda Mahto and 7 Others. In March this year, after the convictions, widow Mariam Ansari had made the headlines with her compassion when she had said 'she was against the death penalty' for the killers of her husband.

This order, dated June 29, 2018 comes merely three months after the historic convictions. On Friday, the Jharkhand High Court suspended the life sentence awarded to 8 convicts including BJP leader Nityananda Mahto. It was on March 21, that a fast track court had imposed life imprisonment on Mahto and 10 other cow vigilantes for the alleged lynching of the deceased, Alimuddin Akhtar Ansari , on June 29 last year for allegedly carrying cow meat in the Ramgarh District of Jharkhand. The bench of Justices H. C. Mishra and B. B. Mangalmurti was hearing the bail applications of the appellants, having been convicted for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 427 / 149, 435 / 149, and 302 / 149 of the Indian Penal Code. Eleven persons, cow vigilantes, had been entenced to life imprisonment in the Alimuddin Ansari lynching case
The Judges have directed Mahto and seven others to be released on bail, during the pendency of the appeals, subject to the furnishing of bail bonds of Rs.10,000 with two sureties of the like amount each.

The Order may be read here.





The prosecution case was instituted on the basis of the FIR lodged by the wife of the deceased on June 29, 2017 wherein, she had stated that her husband had left for Ramgarh at about 8 AM from his village Manua. Two hours hence, she was informed that, in the Ramgarh bazar, twelve named accused persons, including these appellants, had assaulted her husband, dragging him out from a Maruti van, burning the vehicle. Her husband had died on the spot. In the FIR, she had stated that the accused persons could be identified in the photographs and videos.

On the same day, another FIR was lodged by the Officer-in-Charge of the Ramgarh Police Station, wherein he has claimed that at about 9:45 A.M., he was informed that one Maruti van carrying prohibited meat was put to fire by the mob. Based on the said information, the Police Officer reached the place of occurrence at about 10 AM and found that the Maruti van had been put to fire. In two plastic bags, there was prohibited meat and some prohibited meat was also scattered here and there on the road.

One person was found fallen down in injured condition, who disclosed his name as Md. Alimuddin. The injured person had also allegedly admitted that he was carrying the prohibited meat while the mob of unknown persons had waylaid them, put the Maruti van to fire and had assaulted them.

On the basis of the statement of the Officer-in-Charge of Ramgarh Police Station, a case was instituted under Section 414 / 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 12(2) and 12(3) of the Jharkhand Bovine Animal Prohibition of Slaughter Act and Sections 11(D) / 20 21 of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act against the unknown.
 “It is apparent from the evidence on the record that the informant, who is the wife of the deceased, is not the eye-witness to the occurrence.  Some of the eye-witnesses have named some of the accused persons giving omnibus allegation that they had assaulted the deceased. Some photographs and one video that had become viral, is the source of identification of the appellants and this has been proved by P.W.-16, who is the I.O. of the case, during trial...It appears from the record that the video was displayed in the Court and she has identified all the appellants in the said video. From her evidence on record it appears that she has identified these appellants in the Court in the video, in which these appellants were only shown present in the mob.
There is no allegation of any assault against them rather, the allegation of assault on the basis of video is specific against three other co-accused persons who are not the appellants before us. To cap all, it has come in the evidence of I.O., that the source of the video and photographs was not known to her…”, noted the Division Bench of the Jharkhand High Court.
“…it is only apparent that the appellants were the members of the mob, and in view of lack of evidence of specific assault against them, we are inclined to release the appellants on bail”,


Background:

On June 29, 2017 just hours after Prime Minister Narendra Modi condemned lynching under the guise of cow protection, a 45 year old man was killed by a hundred man strong mob in Jharkhand. Alimuddin Ansari aka Asgar Ali of Mouna village was allegedly carrying 200 kgs of meat in his van when he was intercepted by the mob at Bazartand in Ramgarh district. They dragged him outside his vehicle and beat him with sticks and pieces of meat. The mob also set his car on fire.

A video of the assault, that was allegedly deliberately circulated by the assailants on social media, showed that throughout the assault Ansari did not retaliate or fight back, and yet the mob kept beating him relentlessly.  In fact one man even violently snapped Ansari’s head to face the camera and yet Ansari still did not fight back. Ansari was rescued by the police who arrived on the spot in 30 minutes even as he was still being assaulted before a crowd that cheered the assailants. He was first taken to Sardar Hospital in Ramgarh, but transferred to Rajendra Institute of Medical Sciences, Ranchi because of the severity of his injuries. It was at the second hospital that Ansari breathed his last.
How the police responded
While the police reached the spot in about half an hour and rescued Ansari from the clutches of the mob, the statements they subsequently made to the press proved to be terribly problematic. Jharkhand police spokesperson RK Mallick openly and rather irresponsibly speculated that the murder could have been the result of a professional rivalry. “Ali had a criminal record, and was an accused in the kidnapping and murder of a child. He traded in beef and had been getting calls for ransom from his business rivals and local criminals. Still, that does not give anyone the licence to kill him. We will arrest the killers soon,” he was quoted as saying by the Hindustan Times.


Related Articles:

1. Local BJP leader among 11 convicted in Alimuddin Ansari lynching case: Jharkand

2. Gautankwad: Beginning of the End? How a team of dedicated lawyers from Jharkhand secured justice in the Alimuddin Ansari lynching case

 3. Victims of Gautankwad: Alimuddin Ansari