The Godhra 2002 lies: as clarified by Narendra Modi to SIT

Almost 10 years of relentless attack by political oppositions, bogus activists, bleeding heart pseudoliberals and pseudosecular Indian media and the result is a BIG ZERO.

Hope Modi can concentrate now on more worthwhile agenda.

 

Never asked police to allow Hindus to vent their anger

On the contrary, I had issued orders to maintain peace, communal harmony at any cost”

Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi had told the Supreme Court-appointed Special Investigation Team — which is probing some of the gruesome carnages during the 2002 communal riots in the State — that he never issued any instructions to top police officers to allow Hindus to “vent their anger” against Muslims in the aftermath of the Godhra train carnage.

“It is a baseless allegation. On the contrary, I had given categorical and clear-cut instructions to maintain peace and communal harmony at any cost,” Mr. Modi had told SIT Investigating Officer A.K. Malhotra, who questioned him on March 27 and 28, 2010.

Classified document

The statement made by Mr. Modi before the SIT, which was the first and by far the only investigating agency to question him on the 2002 riots, was considered a classified document and formed part of the SIT report submitted before the Supreme Court. But surprisingly, on Thursday, the “signed statement” found a place on the website of a local Gujarati daily. How and who “leaked” Mr. Modi’s statement before the SIT was not known.

According to the statement, countersigned on every page by Mr. Modi on March 28, 2010, the investigating officer had put to him 71 questions and each of them was answered by Mr. Modi, rarely avoiding an answer, claiming “I do not remember.” The Chief Minister was questioned on almost the entire gamut of the riots, the decision to shift the bodies of the Godhra train carnage victims to Ahmedabad, the security arrangements made to meet the tense communal situation, deployment of the Army and his knowledge about the attacks on the minorities in Gulberg Society and Naroda-Patiya localities in Ahmedabad.

Mr. Modi had claimed that shifting of the bodies was a “collective decision” of the top police and administrative officers present in Godhra and was taken to defuse “building up of tension in Godhra.” He claimed that the Army was deployed in the affected areas without any delay and denied that the slain former Congress MP, Ehsan Jafri, had ever contacted him on phone before being killed in the Gulberg Society attack. The Chief Minister denied having any prior knowledge of the attacks on Gulberg Society or Naroda-Patiya. He also denied having asked the then Cabinet Ministers, Ashok Bhatt and I.K. Jadeja, to sit in the Ahmedabad city and State police control rooms and interfere with the functioning of the police on the “Gujarat Bandh” day, February 28, 2002.

Mr. Modi refuted the allegations that he was in “constant touch” with some of the leaders of the BJP and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad, who were later registered as accused in the riots, and denied that the controversial Gujarat cadre IPS officer, Sanjiv Bhatt — who created a flutter later by filing an affidavit in the Supreme Court against the Chief Minister — was present on the crucial law and order meeting at his official residence in Gandhinagar on the night of February 27, 2002, during which he was alleged to have “instructed” the police officers to “allow Hindus to vent their anger.”

Mr. Modi denied that his first reaction to the Godhra train carnage was to declare it a “pre-planned conspiracy,” but admitted that after visiting the site and talking to the police and administrative officials as well as those present at the Godhra railway station who were witnesses to the incident and the injured passengers of the ill-fated coach, he did tell the media in Godhra that the incident “appeared to be a pre-planned conspiracy.” But he had also added that nothing could be said with finality until the investigation was completed. The Chief Minister also denied having ever talked about “Pakistani spy agency ISI’s hand” behind the conspiracy.

Asked about the crucial February 27, 2002 meeting, Mr. Modi had said among those present were the then acting Chief Secretary, Swarna Kanta Varma; the then Additional Chief Secretary (Home), Ashok Narayan; the then Home Secretary, K. Nityanandam; the then Director-General of Police, K. Chakravarthi; Ahmedabad Police Commissioner P.C. Pande; and two senior officials of the CMO, P.K. Mishra and Anil Mukim. “As far as I recollect, the then Additional DGP [Intelligence], G.C. Raigar, was not present. Mr. Sanjiv Bhatt, the then Deputy Commissioner [Intelligence], did not attend as this was a high-level meeting. None of my Cabinet colleagues was present in the said meeting.”

At the meeting, the Chief Minister said he shared information with the officers about his visit to Godhra and the officers briefed him about the precautionary measures being taken by them.

The Chief Minister denied that the State Intelligence Branch (SIB) had given any information about the movement of VHP kar sevaks to and fro from Ayodhya and said if there was any such information, it must be with the departments concerned. On being informed about the train carnage by about 9 a.m. on February 27, he had issued directions that necessary steps be taken to ensure that other passengers were not held up as it could lead to tension and imposition of curfew in Godhra immediately since it was a communally sensitive place.

The Chief Minister said that after reaching Godhra in the evening the same day — after the day’s session of the Assembly was over — he visited the spot and other places and later held a meeting with the government and police officers at the District Collector’s office where a “collective decision” was taken by all present to shift the charred bodies of the victims to Ahmedabad in view of the mounting tension in Godhra. Mr. Modi said the decision was taken because of the knowledge that most of the victims belonged to Ahmedabad or other places beyond Ahmedabad and that their relatives need not go to Godhra for identification and claiming the bodies as Godhra then was under curfew. He also denied that the then District Collector, Jayanti Ravi, had opposed the decision and, on the contrary, she was insistent that the bodies be moved away from Godhra to ease the tension. He also denied that the bodies were handed over to VHP leader Jaydeep Patel as was claimed later. Mr. Modi maintained that the bodies were in the custody of the district administration.

Mr. Modi denied that he had ever given any interview to The Times of India advocating the famous theory of “every action has its reaction.” The newspaper was forced to carry the denial but it was published in an obscure corner and the allegation was repeated against him time and again. He also denied the allegations purportedly made against him by some BJP and VHP leaders in a “so-called sting operation” by the Tehelka Magazine.

The Chief Minister also refuted the allegations made by the retired Additional DGP, R.B. Shreekumar, in affidavits filed before the G.T. Nanavati-Akshay Mehta judicial inquiry commission that his (Mr. Modi’s) officers were trying to influence the retired officer to file false affidavits in favour of the government.

On the petition filed by Zakia Jafri, wife of the slain Congress MP Ehsan Jafri, in the Supreme Court, Mr. Modi said her charges “deserved to dismissed completely and such false and frivolous complaints should not be entertained.”

 

Why is Teesta Setalvaad still roaming free?

Why is this woman still not behind bars?  Are activists and NGO’s beyond the law?

How come the media still pampers her and dances to her tunes?

Is ‘narco tests’ only reserved for alleged ‘Hindu Terrorists’ ?

What if it is true that ‘nine were awarded life term’ based on her false  testimony? Is that not enough for Manmohan Singh to spent sleepless nights?

Best Bakery case: Teesta’s former aide demands retrial

October 13, 2011 14:30 IST

A former aide of activist Teesta Setalvad has moved the Bombay high court seeking retrial of the 2002 Best Bakery case alleging that the latter not only fabricated evidence and falsely implicated innocent persons but also “managed” the witnesses.

Rais Khan Aziz Khan Pathan, in an affidavit, urged the high court to direct an appropriate court in Mumbai to conduct retrial of the case and record his evidence.

Khan, former coordinator of the Citizen for Justice and Peace, the Mumbai-based non-government organisation headed by Teesta, requested that notice be served on Teesta to explain her conduct and clarify allegations of fabricating evidence in the case.

Khan even demanded lie detector and polygraph tests on himself and Teesta to “bring out the truth”.

The affidavit assumes significance as in April 2011, Shaikh Yasmeen Banu, a key prosecution witness in the case, had also filed an affidavit in the high court alleging she was “lured and misguided” by Teesta into giving false testimony against the 17 accused, of which nine were awarded life term by a Mumbai court.

Fourteen people who had taken refuge in the Best Bakery owned by the Shaikh family in Vadodara in Gujarat were killed by a mob on March 1, 2002, during the post-Godhra riots.

The appeals filed by the nine convicts in the sensational case are pending in the Bombay high court. Khan contended that on instructions of Teesta, he had in the past met Yasmeen in Baroda and requested her to shift to Mumbai where the retrial of the case was in progress.    

Yasmeen in her affidavit had accused Khan of cheating her and other witnesses for personal gains, which was denied by him.

Khan contended that he used to get funds from Teesta to organise press conferences for riot victims and meet relevant expenses. He alleged that getting payment for the victims was never Teesta’s priority as she was only concerned to ensure that the witnesses get money.

“While witnesses used to get Rs 50,000 to Rs 1 lakh, the victims were getting only Rs 5,000 (by Teesta),” Khan said. He further stated in the affidavit that he was put up at Sagar Hotel in the Nagpada area of South Mumbai by Teesta for eight months when the trial of Best Bakery case was in progress and was directed by her to keep a close watch on the witnesses.

“After the court issued summons to witnesses, she (Teesta) asked me to bring all of them to Mumbai even before police approached them”, he said.

“Throughout the trial, witnesses were paid Rs 100 a day and the payment was made to them every weekly. Although the court order was to keep witnesses at Vasava Government Hostel in Worli, they were kept at Mariam apartment in Bhindi Bazaar”.

“Neither the police nor the prosecutor ever inquired or asked how these witnesses were so punctually coming to the court for deposition and who is funding their expenses,” he added.

It was stated further in the affidavit that police used to escort every witness to the court and back to the police guesthouse in Worli and during this period nobody was allowed to meet or speak to them.

“As per Teesta’s instructions, I used to provide a mobile phone to each witness so that she can be in touch with them and guide them during their stay in Mumbai,” he said.

“When the Gujarat police were searching for prime witness Zahira Shaikh, Teesta directed me over phone to reach an address in the Alkapuri area of Baroda. When I went there I found she was at a residence of a Muslim woman journalist working with a national daily,” Khan said, adding “Muslim reporters were roped in sentimentally”.

Khan said he had learnt that some of the victims and witnesses like Yasmeen had recently retracted from their earlier statements or affidavits prepared by Teesta’s organisation and that they blamed him for cheating and manipulation.

“These witnesses have put me in a very awkward position and I am afraid that I might be prosecuted by the court for helping the witnesses to give false deposition in the court, which was actually not done by me at all”, he added. out of total 73 witnesses, including Zaheera Shaikh, had turned hostile, saying they had seen nothing the night of the attack.

In February 2006, a Mumbai court had awarded lifer to the nine accused.

Zaheera and other witnesses who had turned hostile were later convicted for perjury.

 

Narendra Modi not out, rules Supreme Court

Opponents sulk but cannot hide their disappoinment. The ‘maut ka saudagar’ has beaten them again ….

God is great, tweets Modi after Supreme Court verdict

New Delhi, Sep 12 (IANS) Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi Monday thanked god after the Supreme Court verdict directing a trial court to hear a petition against him in the killing of former MP Ehsan Jafri in the 2002 riots.

“God is great,” Modi tweeted on the microblogging site Twitter.

The apex court order came after a petition filed by Zakia Jafri, the widow of Ehasan Jafri, urging a probe into Modi’s role in the Gulberg society carnage and the trial of the case by a special court outside the state.

BJP leader Sushma Swaraj congratulated Modi, saying truth has won.

“Narendrabhai has passed Agnipareeksha today. My heartiest congraulations to him. Satyameva jayate. Varshon baad aaj satya ki vijay hui,” she tweeted.

 

Sanjeev Bhatt: a SIT reject, pampered by Modi-hounding Media

Predictably Congress sponsored Indian media hatches an ‘inside story’ to hype up the frenzy against Narendra Modi. Trust them at your peril.

This is obviously a big thrill for the opponents including fraudsters like Teesta Setalvad.

After Anna Hazare whirlwind, another tornado is created to dilute all the scams like Adarsh, CWG, Spectrum, Bribes for vote, foreign held funds etc.

 

“Too junior IPS Sanjeev Bhatt was not present at all in that meeting”
Ahmedabad, 22 April, 2011

…… -SIT Chairman Raghavan notes: ‘The inquiry clearly established that a meeting was in fact held at the chief minister’s residence on the night of 27.02.02 after the chief minister’s return to Ahmedabad following his visit to Godhra earlier in the day.’ (Page 3 of chairman’s comments)

-According to SIT report before Supreme Court the meeting lasted for about half an hour. There were eight confirmed participants: 1. Chief Minister 2. Acting Chief Secretary 3. Additional Chief Secretary (Home) 4. DGP 5. Ahmedabad Commissioner of Police 6. Secretary (Home) 7. Principal Secretary to CM 8. Secretary to CM

……. -When inquiry officer of SIT examined Narendra Modi on 25 March 2010, Modi admitted that he had called a law and order meeting at his residence on 27 February 2002, after his return from Godhra where he had gone to inspect the Sabarmati carnage. Asked about who was present, Modi named the seven officers, apart from himself, listed above. Modi also said, “Sanjeev Bhatt, the then DC (Int.) did not attend, as this was a high level meeting.”

  …….. -Before the SIT, three of the senior officers present — “pleaded loss of memory due to passage of time”. (Page 16)  Four other officers — have categorically denied that the CM had instructed the police not to control Hindu mobs for a window of time. ……. 

…… -Wrapping up his observation, the inquiry officer of SIT states: “It can be concluded that a law and order meeting was in fact held by Modi at his residence late in the evening of 27 February 2002. However, the allegation that the chief minister instructed the chief secretary, DGP and other senior officials to allow the Hindu community to vent their anger on the Muslims in the wake of Godhra incident is not established.”

..…. –Other seven officers at the meeting have denied to support Bhatt’s claim that he was present in the meeting. While three officers have pleaded loss of memory, then DGP has categorically denied Bhatt’s presence. Others too have not supported Bhatts’s claim.

–SIT has concluded on page 149 of his report, “Since Bhatt’s presence at the meeting is not proved his statement has to be ignored.”

-The SIT has stated that, “Bhatt is considered an unreliable witness, especially because no official, who is known to have definitely attended the meeting has spoken of his presence there. Also he was considered too junior to have been invited to such a high-level meeting.” (Pages 3-4 of chairman’s comments)