Normally every human being faces some puzzles which always roam around him/her. No doubt, I am also normal and the puzzle which roams around me is in the form of question.
I never understand why an accussed, in a case, gets bail after so many years? And, why another accussed, in another case, gets bail very next day? Why an accussed is found innocent and freed from bars after languishing there many years?
What kind of justice system is this? It is totally ridiculous when you keep an man behind bars for years and suddenly one day you find him innocent and thus ask him to go out. Why do you not check whether he is guilty or not expeditiously? Does a court or investigating agency enjoy a right to spoil the precious time of an accussed? Can any sort of court return his or her precious time which he or she spends inside the jail?
It is very common to read news like some body has been found innocent while he has been behind bars for years in India.
We know that recently seven accussed in the Malegaon blast case have got bail after spending 5 long years in the jail. They have got bail means that still accusation has not been proved against them. Thus they remained in jail for doing nothing. Can the court return them their 5 years? In case they are found innocent in trials; will it not be an irony?
The thing which is more important here in the above case is that only after Swami Asemanad's confession about the alleged involvment of right-wing Hindu fundamentalist the line of investigation changed. After the confession of Swami the investigation is under NIA. Earlier ATS and CBI were handling the case. Here it is clear that had Asemanand not confessed the case would have been in wrong direction and moreover investigaters might have convicted the accussed people.
ATS and CBI had accussed them because they were the members of SIMI. Whether SIMI was a terriorist organisation or not is a question of debate. I would not go into that. But I must say that just being a member of any organisation does not prove that you are involved in the activities that the organisation does. Recently, a Supreme Court ruling has also argued that membership of an organisation does not proves his or her involvement in a case.
As far as SIMI and ban on it is concerned I am not saying that it was not a terriorist organisation. I do not know whether it was or not. But an organisation which was involved in the killing of father of nation must be called terriorist organisation. It is the biggest irony of India that the organisation which killed Mahatma Gandhi, father of nation, is not banned in the country. It openly spread its philosophy of hatred in the country. It propagates its idiology of hindu nation in the world's largest democratic and secular country.
