As per a televised interview by Zaheera Shaikh, one of the survivors who had witnessed the entire saga, a large mob surrounded the bakery in the evening, around 8 pm.
[7] Amnesty International reports that in many cases of the Gujarat violence, police recorded complaints in a defective manner, failed to collect witnesses' statements as well as corroborative evidence and did not investigate the responsibility of eminent suspects.
When the mob gathered, shouting communal slogans, her family fled to the terrace and some locked themselves in a first-floor room.
The mob set the bakery on fire and killings continued from 6 pm to 10 am the next day, a period of sixteen hours.
[4] However, as per documents presented to the court, Zaheera's FIR was registered by the Gujarat Police|police on 4 March 2002, leading the defence to oppose its use and the judge to suspect its validity and the possibility of it having been doctored by the police to implicate innocent people at the expense of the guilty perpetrators.
The prosecution claimed that these witnesses had suffered head injuries and were not in a mental state to give an accurate account of their experiences, but could not explain the lucidity of the affidavits.
The judgment was delivered on 27 June 2003 by additional sessions judge Hemantsinh U Mahida of the Vadodara fast track court.
The judgment was critical of the police for delay in registering FIR and for not investigating the incident properly and harassing innocent people, including the accused.
Amnesty International criticized the judgment as "the lack of government commitment to ensuring justice to victims of the communal violence in Gujarat.
"[8] India's National Human Rights Commission described it as a "miscarriage of justice" and, along with other petitioners, argued that the case should be investigated by an independent agency.
Due to this, media coverage and protests by several citizens groups, the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC) visited Vadodara on 8 July to examine documents related to the case.
The Supreme Court ordered that the retrial be moved out of Gujarat after accusing the state government of judicial failures on 12 April 2004 in Maharashtra.
Further, she said that "after the fast track court had acquitted the 21 accused, two Muslims had barged into her house and told her that to change her statement in the interest of the community.
After being indicted by the Supreme Court of India, the police registered a case against Shrivastav Madhubhai Babubhai for intimidating witnesses to the incident.
At the same time, the committee gave a clean chit to social activist Teesta Setalavad of the charges of inducement levelled against her by Zahira.
[25] On 10 January 2005, the court referred the matter for inquiry on being faced with the flip-flops of Zahira much to the embarrassment of her one time protector and social activist Setalavad.
The court imposed a fine of Rs 100 on Sehrunnisa after reading her reply to a show-cause notice issued to her earlier in the day.
It acquitted five accused, Rajubhai Baria, Pankaj Gosavi, Jagdish Rajput, Suresh alias Lalo Devjibhai Vasava and Shailesh Tadvi, for lack of evidence.