PaRCha – JNU – DSF SFI-JNU – 2012 ID-57342
Image by PaRChA project
.
Tehelka -India’s Independent Weekly News Magazine Page 5 of 9 .
What makes all this even murkier is that the SIT has reported that Ashok Narayan, the then additional chief secretary (Home), lied blatantly when asked about the two ministers presence in the Police Control Rooms. DGP K Chakravarthi told the SIT that he was informed by Ashok Narayan that it was decided by the government that IK Jadeja would sit in DGPs office on 28 February 2002 to get information about the law and order situation in the state, as the State Control Room was located in his office. Ashok Narayan also informed him that Ashok Bhatt would similarly sit in the Ahmedabad City Police Control Room situated in the office of Ahmedabad city. .
IK Jadeja was the minister of urban housing while Ashok Bhatt was the health minister at the time. Neither had any business being at the police headquarters. But when he was questioned on this, Ashok Narayan denied having given any such instructions to Chakravarthi. .
The then Ahmedabad police commissioner PC Pande also lied about Ashok Bhatts prolonged presence in the city police control room. Pande claims the minister may have been there for 10-15 minutes. Ashok Bhatts version tallies with Pandes. However, when minister IK Jadeja was questioned, he claimed it was Gordhan Zadaphia, Modis deputy in the home ministry, who had asked him to remain present in the police control room. (Zadaphia has since fallen out with Modi and floated his own party. It is, therefore, convenient for Modi and the BJP to pass all the blame on solely to Zadaphia.) .
Through all this, it is clear that in trying to pass the buck, Chakravarthi, Narayan and Pande have ended up lying and contradicting each other before the SIT. .
On the other hand, its only Sanjeev Bhatt who appears to be consistent with his version of events. He told the SIT that he had registered his protest with DGP Chakravarthi about the presence of ministers in the control room and, with his permission, shifted them to an empty room in the same building. He says he further remembers some of the supporting staff of Jadeja seeking certain information from the state IB on that day and on subsequent two or three days. (DGP Chakravarthi does not refute Sanjeev Bhatt on this as it only shows him in good light.) .
The critical question here is why were these ministers and their political staff seeking sensitive information like that of deployment of police forces in different regions? Was the information passed on to the rioters on the ground? In any case, what were ministers of urban housing and health doing in a police room during the riots? .
SIT Chairman Raghavan states: It has been conclusively established that two ministers were indeed operating from the two control rooms for a few days from 28 February 2002 onwards. There is however no information to establish that they interfered with police operations. .
There seems to be little use in pointing out repeatedly how the SIT failed to push its findings towards harder investigation. Instead, it is time to pose a different question: is this the way to ascertain the truth behind one of the countrys worst communal massacres? Can a massive conspiracy about a state-orchestrated pogrom be unravelled by merely recording statements of police officers who themselves were complicit in one way or the other? .
The police who did take corrective action against rioting Hindu mobs were shunted out. Inexplicably, the SIT claims this is the governments prerogative .
The SIT report does not only record how compliant police officers were rewarded. In a shocking litany of cases, it also records how upright police officers were punished instantly and unambiguously for doing their job, sending out a stark message. If this does not count for mala fide intention on the part of the government, what can? .
Rahul Sharma, an IPS officer of 1992 batch, is just one example. Superintendent of police, Bhavnagar district, in 2002, Sharma had done a commendable job of controlling the murderous riots by taking swift action against those Hindu leaders who were inciting communal passions. But Sharma told the SIT that three days after he had protected a mosque from being torched by a rioting Hindu mob and saved the lives of dozens of Muslim children, he was transferred out to an insignificant posting. Though Zadaphia had called and commended him, he had said the ratio of Hindus and Muslims killed in police firing was not proper, i.e., that is more number of deaths of Hindus than Muslims. Soon after, he was transferred. (Page 33) .
Another police officer, Vivek Srivastava, a 1989 batch IPS officer, who was superintendent of police of Kutch district was shunted out after he arrested a BJP leader on charges of assaulting a Muslim family. According to the report, Srivastava stated that he got a few phone calls from the office of home minister and chief minister asking him about the details of the case and whether there was adequate evidence against all the accused to which he confirmed that sufficient evidence was available. Srivastava was transferred in the last week of March 2002 and posted as deputy commissioner, Prohibition & Excise, Ahmedabad Zone. (Page 33) .
Another IPS officer Himanshu Bhatt, who was SP, Banaskantha, was transferred to the State Intelligence Bureau at Gandhinagar in March 2002. Bhatt had initiated action against a sub-inspector who had assisted a rioting mob. As it happened the sub-inspector concerned had important political connections and was not only reinstated but also allowed to resume his duty at the same police station. Bhatt has since left the country and settled abroad. The SIT couldnt examine Bhatt. .
Satish Chandra Verma, who was DIG, border range at Kutch-Bhuj during the riots, had issued a formal order to arrest a sitting BJP MLA, Shankar Chaudhary, for being involved in the riots and killing two Muslims. He was transferred soon after as the principal of the State Reserve Police Training Centre, Junagadh. (Page 34) .
Inquiry officer Malhotra notes that none of these officers, however, would admit that they were victimised. All of them stated that transfers were the prerogative of the government. Malhotra concludes that these transfers appear to be unusual and .
.
PHOTO: TRUPTI PATEL .
fishy but stops there. Raghavan too admits to their controversial and questionable nature. But, surprisingly, neither of them comes to the obvious conclusion that this could be one of the reasons for further investigation into the States collusion. .
.
The SIT admits that police officers who allowed riots to fester were rewarded with lucrative postings. But fails to come to a logical conclusion .
In a brazen statement, as upright officers were clipped for doing their duty by the Modi government, derelict officers, who had made a mockery of their uniforms and the trust reposed in them by society, were applauded and rewarded. .
MK Tandon, who was the joint commissioner of police of Sector 2, Ahmedabad and in whose region more than 200 Muslims were butchered to death, was given the important posting of IG, Surat Range, soon after the riots. In July 2005, he was appointed to the post of ADGP (law & order) at the state police headquarters, a position with statewide jurisdiction. Tandon retired from the same position. .
.
The SIT has found that Tandon deliberately didnt respond to distress calls from Gulberg Society and Naroda Gaon and Naroda Patiya, where some of the most gruesome massacres were underway. Instead, he got bogus cases registered in other parts of Ahmedabad to justify the presence of himself and his police force in those areas rather than Gulberg and Naroda. The SIT has also found that Tandon was in telephonic contact with Jaideep Patel and Mayaben Kodnani the architect of massacres at Naroda Gaon and .
.
Naroda Patiya. .
PB Gondia, deputy to Tandon, was DCP Zone IV at the time. He now enjoys the powerful post of inspector general of police of State CID. In his report, Malhotra says: In my view Gondia virtually ran away from Naroda Patiya at 1420 hours when the situation was very serious and virtually uncontrollable and also did not reach Gulberg Society despite the distress calls. The SIT also found that, like Tandon, Gondia was in regular telephonic contact with Kodnani and Jaideep Patel. .
In addition to these police officers, there were other controversial bureaucrats who have remained in high government favour despite their black track records. Among them are G Subba Rao, the then chief secretary; Ashok Narayan, the then ACS (Home); PK Mishra, the then PS to Modi; PC Pande, the then Ahmedabad CP; Deepak Swaroop, the then IGP, Vadodara Range; K Nityanandam, the then secretary (Home); Rakesh Asthana (presently commissioner of police of Vadodara city) and DG Vanzara (now in jail for staging encounter killings). .
The SIT also notes that, while conducting the trail of the Best Bakery Case, the additional sessions judge of Greater Bombay had made adverse comments and passed strictures against K Kumaraswamy, the then joint CP, Vadodara city and Ramjibhai Pargi, the then ACP, Vadodara city for attempting to subvert justice. .
file://C:Documents and SettingsAdministratorDesktoptehelka_SIT.htm 16/04/2012 .
.
.
.
.