10 years on, cop fails to recognize blast accused

AHMEDABAD: Worst fears of the state government in the sensitive 2008 serial blasts case are coming turning true. Due to delayed trial, an investigator has failed to recognize the accused whom he had investigated 10 years ago.
A DySP posted in Bharuch, Vinay Shukla, failed to identify three suspects lodged in Sabarmati central jail earlier this month during his deposition before a special court.
Justifying his inability to identify the accused in two attempts through video-conferencing, Shukla told the court, “Ten years have lapsed since the incident and their (accused) body language has changed. They have put on weight, sport a beard and wear glasses. They are not recognizable as their appearances have changed a lot since I saw them then (in 2008).”
In 2015, the prosecution had requested the court to permit its witnesses to identify the suspects through their photographs affixed in the chargesheet because their changed looks over the years would confuse witnesses in identification process during the trial. The plea was rejected by the trial court. A request by the state government to allow prosecution to follow a unique procedure of identification is now pending before Gujarat high court.
During the cross-examination in the special court, an accused's lawyer questioned DySP Shukla whether he was using altered looks of the accused as an excuse to refuse to identify the three named in the serial blast at the behest of the state government. The cop denied this.
Shukla was posted as Ellisbridge police inspector when serial blasts rocked the city on July 26, 2008 killing 56 persons and injuring nearly 200 others.
‘Video quality at jail was poor’
Shukla was asked to join investigation, though he was not a designated Investigating Officer (IO). He told the court that he was assigned to probe three accused persons – Imran Ibrahim Shaikh, Shamsuddin Shaikh and Jahid Shaikh. He said that they voluntarily showed police how they had carried out the terror strike. The process of recovery and discovery from these accused took place in his presence.After completion of Shukla’s examination by prosecution, he was shown accused through video-conferencing from Bhopal and Sabarmati prisons, but he could not identify the three persons on September 1. Shukla said that the video quality at Sabarmati jail was poor. The identification process was postponed and he was cross-examined in between. On September 5, the identification process could not take place because police escort was not available to bring the accused to the courtroom situated in Sabarmati jail. On September 6, Shukla was asked to identify the accused through video-conferencing again as the video quality was clear, but he could not identify them.
Court denies permission to ask questions on Narendra Modi government: The special judge hearing the 2008 serial blasts case, A R Patel did not allow the defense advocate to ask questions about the then Narendra Modi government in Gujarat. Advocate L R Pathan questioned DySP Vinay Shukla, “Can you say it was Narendra Modi’s government in Gujarat when the serial blasts took place?”. The court denied permission to ask this question. The court also refused to permit him to pose a reframed question to the police officer about whether it was Narendra Modi’s government that existed in Gujarat between 2008 and 2014.