Talk:Gulbarg Society massacre

Cause of death?

How can someone be hacked to death *and* burned alive? Tsuguya (talk) 16:44, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

Good point, have made some changes accordingly to clarify. --Ekabhishek^talk 06:15, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Biased coverage and false information

the first para ended as follows:

"On March 2011 Sessions Court Judge H A Shah considering the case as "rarest of rare" pronounced death penalty for 71 out of 104 convicted in the case while 33 others were sentenced to life imprisonment. Later some of the accused go on Supreme Court of India for review application."

which I have removed as there is no citation, and a google search shows that the case was put on hold by the supreme court after the public prosecutor resigned in 2010 . I doubt a simple google would not lead to a news article for such a case featuring prominently in the national media, further india's justice system is too slow to get a judgement in under a year after a hold on the trial.

75.49.251.113 (talk) 22:59, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

This page contains potentially derogatory material, by quoting the number of deaths on the basis of religion. This information shouldn't be shown directly Sachinndaas (talk) 02:40, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Regarding re-opening issue

This user has been adding wrong information on wiki pages that the case has been reopened while merely a protest petition has been accepted. Rather I guess the investigation was never closed as the case is still pending, reopening would be a far off thing then. Arguendo, even if the case were so, the case has not been reopned. It is in investigation since 2004. I had pointed out this to him earlier as well. I request him not to carry on disruptive edits.--Mohit Singh (talk) 07:45, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

In fact i have been correcting the erroneous information provided by User:MohitSingh on numerous occasions. The wikipedia page on the Gulbarga society massacre still says "The Supreme Court, on March 26, 2008, ordered the Narendra Modi government to re-investigate 10 cases in the 2002 Gujarat riots, including the Godhra train burning and subsequent Godhra riots where 81 people were killed, Gulbarg Society where 68 were killed, Naroda Patia where over 100 were killed, Sardarpur where 34 were killed and Best Bakery case where 14 people were burnt alive." By 're-opening' i meant 'reinvestigate': i see very little difference between these two terms. I am also impressed by User:MohitSingh's attempt to keep whitewashing Narendra Modi by repeatedly removing the information on this wikipedia page (the main article on the Gulbarg Society Massacre) that a case regarding Modi's complicity is still going on in the court after the widow of Ehsaan Jafri named him as one of the accused in this massacre. I am changing the tag to keep things civil here. I also intend to go for Dispute Resolution if User:MohitSingh insists that the whitewashing of Narendra Modi must continue and it should not be mentioned on this page that a case regarding his complicity in this massacre is currently going on in in an Indian court. Soham321 (talk) 14:08, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

For God's sake will you please stop using the terms Dispute and Dispute Resolution. I do not understand why did you change the section heading to dispute between us. I may like you to refer to a legal dictionary to get the exact meaning. Please understand that there is no dispute between us. However I have changed the section heading to an uncontroversial term.

Please make only those comments here which are relevant to the topic being discussed. Why did you mentioned Naroda Patia and other riots here? Also, please stop telling everytime to take me or other people to dispute resolution. You took me there last time regarding the same biasness of yours and you know that you could not prove your point. By the way, I should tell you that I am a lawyer and I am a professional in Dispute resolution.

Please do not make ridiculous statements like I am also impressed by User:MohitSingh's attempt to keep whitewashing Narendra Modi by repeatedly removing the information on this wikipedia page (the main article on the Gulbarg Society Massacre) that a case regarding Modi's complicity is still going on in the court after the widow of Ehsaan Jafri named him as one of the accused in this massacre. None of my edits were wrong here. If you have them then do prove them categorically in this talk page. I did not remove any information. I had only changed the lead to a section in the other page.

Coming back to the issue, as you imply that your legal knowledge is limited, I shall clarify to you following points, which I had done earlier also:

• Re-opening and re-investigation of a case as you suggest, is done only after a case is over. Note this point that Hon'ble Supreme Court did not order to reopen or as you suggest re-investigate the case. Court merely accepted a protest petition. If you need a legal clarification as to what does these mean, I shall further elaborate to you if you may ask for it. If you have any contrary information, please provide.
• The transfer was a routine transfer as the judge's term had ended. There was no role of Govt there and nor did the amicus curae suggested any malafide intention there.

I request you to keep your discussion limited to these two issues only.--Mohit Singh (talk) 16:46, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Now that you have yourself inserted the allegation of complicity of Narendra Modi in this massacre (AFTER our dispute) my dispute with you is over so far as this issue is concerned. Soham321 (talk) 20:13, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

What a big time liar you are Mr. Soham321? The last edit made by me was at 08:03, 17 May 2013 while you made your allegation at 14:08, 17 May 2013 First look at yourself before making false allegations. Unlike you I am not making any further allegations against you.

Chill man! Avoid using CAPITAL LETTERS on a talk page. Go through the guidelines here.

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Gulbarg Society massacre. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100301221922/http://www.daylife.com/photo/01kddwZ2r3b68 to http://www.daylife.com/photo/01kddwZ2r3b68
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090714023356/http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl1910/19100040.htm to http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/fl1910/19100040.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:16, 25 October 2017 (UTC)