30 years on, 1993 Bombay riots ‘rioter’ acquitted

A sessions court last week gave the “benefit of the doubt” to a man booked for rioting during the 1993 Bombay riots in Wadala area and acquitted him.

Shivpujan Rajbhar – who went absconding after his initial arrest and was held again only last month – could have been an “innocent bystander”, the court said.

Additional Sessions Judge AA Kulkarni said the prosecution had failed to prove its charges against him.

“There is no independent witness to identify the accused,” the court stated, while acknowledging that the incident took place 1993 and after such a long delay witnesses cannot be found to identify the accused. The court also remarked that as the mob comprised 300 to 400 people, it is difficult to ascertain who actively participated in vandalizing property. “Though for the sake of argument, it is assumed that the present accused was present at the spot, it may be possible that he is an innocent bystander,” Judge Kulkarni said in the order.

Rajbhar, who hails from Uttar Pradesh, was booked by the Wadala Police Station in 1993 under Indian Penal Code Sections 307 (attempt to murder) and 143 (unlawful assembly), among other related offences.

As per the prosecution’s case, he was part of a mob that gathered at Deenbandhu Nagar on January 12, 1993, around 3am. The patrolling police had found that the mob, belonging to people from two different communities, were throwing stones and soda bottles at one another. The police tried to control the mob, but the mob did not relent, compelling them to use lathi-charge and finally fire into the air. In the melee one person was injured and taken to hospital. Rajbhar was among 15 people arrested.

In 2003, a sessions court had acquitted 10 of Rajbhar’s co-accused. Again, in 2021, one co-accused who had been absconding and was later arrested, was acquitted. Rajbhar’s case had been separated as he was absconding. On March 28, he was arrested by the Wadala police and brought before the court. He had been in judicial custody since then. The prosecution used the evidence produced in the previous trials in his case.