|
Note: This
has been converted using automatic software, so please check the original
before use
Sanjeev’s
comments are in blue highlight. This will be constantly updated as more data
comes in.
This draft
dated 9 February 2014. Time permitting I’ll revise it. I also request those
who have time and know more to track changes and send me an updated version.
Please
read this in light of my ‘book’ The Truth About Modi and various other blog posts that I’ve not yet
incorporated into the book.
|
Date:
27 & 28-03-2010
Statement
of Shri Narendra Modi, S/o Shri Darnodardas Modi, aged about 60 years, R/o, CM
Bungalows, Sector-19, Gandhinagar.
Q.1
When did you become the Chief Minister of Gujarat?
Ans. I
am working as the Chief Minister of Gujarat State since October, 2001
Q2.
Who were the Chief Secretary, ACS (Home), DGP and Actd1 DG (intelligence)
during the month of February 2002?
Ans. in
February, 2002, Shri G. Subba Rao was the Chief Secretary, Shri Ashok Narayan
was ACS (Home), Shri K. Chakravarthi was the DGP and Shri G C Raigar was the
ADG (Int.).
0.3.
Who was the in-charge of the State Intelligence Bureau during the first quarter
of 2002?
Ans. Shri
G.C.Raigar, ADG was the in charge of State Intelligence Bureau till 9-4 - 2002.
Thereafter, he was transferred and Shri R.B Sreekumar took over as Addl DG (Int
).
Q.4.
What were the intelligence inputs collected by SIB in Gujarat in connection
with 'Ram Maha-Yagna' proposed to be held by Vishwa Hindu Parished in the year
2002?
Ans. I
would like to add that I became the Chief Minister, Gujarat State in October 2001.
Before that I was General Secretary organisation of BJP with headquarters at
Delhi. It was only after the earth quake in 2001 that I was deputed by the High
Command to do relief as well constructive work in Gujarat State. It may be
further added here that I had contested my first election in my life from
Rajkot Assembly Constituency. The by-election to this constituency was held on
24-2-2002. I was elected to the Gujarat Assembly. As regards the intelligence
reports about the Ram Mahyagna, these reports are normally received by the DGP
and ACS (Home) and as per the rules of business they only look after this
issue.
[Sanjeev: This is absurd obfuscation. Modi and VHP were
in constant daily touch. He was ABVP chief of Gujarat for many years, he was
key strategist for BJP from 1987, spending most of his time in Gujarat. He
became CM not because he knew nothing of Gujarat but because he knew everyone
that mattered.]
Q5
Whether the intelligence inputs received by SIB were communicated to the
Government? If so, when and to whom?
Ans. I
did come to know that some of the Ram-sevaks from Gujarat State were going to
Ayodhya for Ram Mahayagna, but I had no knowledge of their programme as it was
the duty of the police and the Home Department to make necessary bandobast in
this regard,
[Sanjeev: He was Home Minister. Very convenient to say
that he didn’t know. Who else was supposed to know? It was Modi’s job as Chief
Minister and Home Minister to know everything. He must CLEARLY knew about the
issues regarding aggressive behaviour of the Ram Sevaks.]
EVIDENCE
THAT PROVES MODI IS LYING
Zakia
Jafri’s written statement to the court on 18 September 2013 against Narendra
Modi
1.
Willfully Ignoring Messages from State Intelligence about the Violent
Repercussions of the RSS-VHP called ‘Mahayajna’ before the tragic Godhra
incident on 27.2.2002 and deliberately not initiating precautionary measures
that are imperative under Standard Operational Procedure; messages from 7.2.2002 to 25.2.2002,
including specific ones that stated that batches of 2,800 and 1,900 kar
sevaks had left for Faizabad-Ayodhya and had been behaving provocatively and
aggressively against minorities on the way. As cabinet minister for home and
chief minister, he is directly responsible. MOS Home Gordhan Zadaphiya is a
constant Co-Conspirator.
2.
Deliberately concealing knowledge of the provocative, anti-Muslim
sloganeering by kar sevaks at the Godhra station when the Sabarmati Express
reached five hours late on 27.2.2002, which information had been sent to him
directly by DM/Collector Jayanti Ravi and willfully failing to take stern
action and allowing violent incidents to escalate after the train left Godhra
by about 1.15 p.m. especially at Vadodara station where a Muslim was attacked
and killed and at Anand where the train stopped hereafter ensuring that the
state allowed a hate-filled and threatening atmosphere against Muslims build
right up to Ahmedabad where the train finally reached around 4 p.m. and where
bloodthirsty slogans were being shouted. FIRs in 19 brutal incidents against
Muslims are recorded on 27.2.2002 in Ahmedabad itself. Curfew was not imposed
despite these incidents resulting in deaths breaking out.
|
Q6
Did SIB send any communication about the movement of the Karsevaks? If so, when
and to whom?
Ans. I
am not aware of any such communications received from SIB and if at all, it was
received the same must be with the department.
[Sanjeev: SIT did a shoddy job. It should have checked
official records including any official briefings received by Modi. A criminal
ALWAYS denies everything. SID refused to challenge with proof.]
Q7
How and when did you come to know about the incident relating to burning of a
railway coach of Sabarmati express near Godhra railway station on 27.02.2002?
Ans. On
27-2-2002 around 9:00 hrs, I received an information from the Shri Ashok
Narayan, the then ACS (Home) about the burning of a railway coach of Sabarmati
Express near Godhra Railway Station.
[Sanjeev: The main thing is what he did next. That the
SIT conveniently did not ask.]
EVIDENCE
THAT PROVES MODI IS LYING
Zakia
Jafri’s written statement to the court on 18 September 2013 against Narendra
Modi
3.
Conspiring with the Vishwa Hindu Parishad to plot and allow reprisal killings
all over Gujarat. The first phone call that Modi makes after DM Ravi’s fax
reaches him is, not to appeal for peace and calm, but
phone secretary VHP, Gujarat, Dr Jaideep Patel and direct him to Godhra.
The
Conspiracy between Modi and the VHP is hatched and unfurled to cynically
ensure state-wide reprisal killings. Phone
call records show these phone calls between PA to Modi AP Patel and Jaideep
Patel immediately after the chief minister receives news of the Godhra
tragedy. Phone
call records made available by Rahul Sharma (IPS, Gujarat) also show that
Powerful Accused were in touch with the chief minister’s office (CMO) and the
landline numbers of the chief minister.
|
Q.8
What was your immediate reaction and what were the steps taken about this
incident?
Ans. I
held discussions with Shri Gordhan Zadafia, the then MoS (Home), Shri Ashok
Narayan, the then ACS (Home) and other officials of Home and Police Department
and asked them to collect the facts because the issue was going to be raised in
the Assembly. I gave directions that necessary steps be taken that the other
passengers should not be delayed, which may lead to tension. I also gave
instructions that Godhra was communally sensitive place and that necessary
steps like curfew etc. should be taken immediately to avoid any untoward
incident and that senior police officers and extra force, if required should
reach the spot without any delay.
[Sanjeev: Modi
conveniently forgot to mention that he FIRST called VHP, even as he started
working out a strategy to pretend to be doing “something”.]
Q.9.
Did you say in the Assembly that "Hindus should wake up now"?
Ans. It
is baseless allegation. No such words were uttered by me.
EVIDENCE
THAT PROVES MODI IS LYING
Parikh
also submitted a copy of a statement, dated August 15, 2009, given by the
then senior state minister Suresh Mehta to SIT.
"As
per Mehta's statement, he was sitting next to Narendra Modi in the assembly
on February 27, 2002 when Modi said `Hindus should wake up now'. This shows
his mindset against Muslims and that he wanted targeted violence against that
community," Parikh alleged.
|
Q.10
Did you declare the Godhra incident as pre-planned and that Pakistani/ISI hands
were behind the Godhra incident? If so, on what basis?
Ans. I
did not utter any such words in the Assembly. Of course, the media had put some
questions to me about it, but I had told that nothing could be said till the
investigation was completed.
EVIDENCE
THAT PROVES MODI IS LYING
The high
court ruling exposed Modi’s attempt to magnify the Godhra arson as a terror
attack. This in turn was integral to probing Jafri’s charge that Modi was
himself involved in the conspiracy behind the post-Godhra violence. Without
bringing up the word ‘terror’, Malhotra did ask Modi about the basis of his
allegation. But he was allowed to get away with the claim that he had never
made any such allegation. In fact, Malhotra helped Modi get away with the
denial by putting the question in a misplaced context. While interrogating
him in a chronological sequence, Malhotra asked Modi about his Godhra
allegation in the course of questions about his statement in the Gujarat
assembly early in the afternoon on February 27. This was misplaced as the
allegation had actually come later in the day from Godhra. Here’s how the
charade played out during the recording of Modi’s testimony:
Malhotra:
Did you declare the Godhra incident as pre-planned and that Pakistani/ISI
hands were behind the Godhra incident? If so, on what basis?
Modi: I
did not utter any such words in the assembly. Of course, the media had put
some questions to me about it, but I had told [them] that nothing could be
said until the investigation was completed.
In other
words, Modi admitted that on the conspiracy question, his initial reaction on
the fateful day was that he would rather not comment till the police had
unravelled the crime. It was a tacit acknowledgement that, as head of the
state government, he could ill-afford the luxury of baseless speculation lest
it provoke a law and order crisis. A logical follow-up to that could have
been: how could he then abandon all caution the same evening and make the
terror allegation without waiting for the police investigation to be
completed? The SIT never put any such question to Modi; not even after he had
made no bones about the dramatic change in his attitude to pre-judging the
case during his visit to Godhra the same day. The closest Malhotra came to
doing so while dealing with the Godhra visit was when he asked Modi a general
question about his media interaction in that town.
Malhotra:
Did you meet mediapersons at Godhra?
Modi:
While I was at Collectorate, Godhra, a lot of mediapersons had assembled
there. I briefed them about the incident and informed them that the culprits
would not be spared and that a compensation of Rs 2 lakh per victim would be
paid. I also appealed to [the] public through them for maintenance of peace.
I also informed the media that on the basis of facts narrated to me by the
persons present on the spot as well as injured persons, the incident appeared
to be a serious and preplanned conspiracy. (emphasis added)
It was thus
left to Modi to reconstruct on his own the allegation he had made in Godhra.
The SIT did not challenge his attempt to make out that he had talked merely
of conspiracy and not of terror. Modi could have been confronted with, if
nothing else, the official press release issued on the evening of February
27. On the strength of his “spot assessment of the situation”, it quoted Modi
as saying that the Godhra incident was a “preplanned inhuman collective
violent act of terrorism”. The torrent of adjectives showed that he had
described Godhra quite definitively as a terrorist conspiracy.
Such
certitude was, however, missing eight years later when he was being
questioned by the SIT. Modi claimed that all he had instead said on the day
of the arson was that it was an ordinary criminal conspiracy (“serious and
preplanned”), that too in a qualified manner (“appeared to be”). The
sanitised account he presented to the SIT was apparently intended to convey
that on the evening of February 27, 2002, he had shown due restraint in the
face of extreme provocation.
|
Further:
EVIDENCE
THAT PROVES MODI IS LYING
A:
That same day a statement came from the CM that it was “ISI
conspiracy”. Now from where did it dawn upon him that it was an ISI
conspiracy? When we in the intelligence knew not? And investigators could not
make head or tail of it. In the afternoon when I spoke with the SP and asked
him about the loss of lives, he said, “I had just entered it (compartment)
and very hot inside. Not more than 15 to 20. Actually when the bodies were
brought out we could know that it was much more. The ISI again was the
creation of Modi. And it was picked up by investigators.
|
EVIDENCE
THAT PROVES MODI IS LYING
Though
Modi had called it a terror crime within hours of the train arson, the trial
court held that all the 28 Muslims arrested before the eruption of the post
Godhra massacres had been falsely implicated. Further, all the nine VHP
members cited as prosecution witnesses were rejected as unreliable. The
investigation was so cavalier that the forensic team was called for the first
time to the scene of the crime, including the burnt coach, only after it had
been transgressed by the public for over two months. These were indications
that the Modi regime was more interested in deriving political mileage from
the Godhra tragedy than in tracing the real culprits.
|
Q.11.
Did you attend the Assembly on 27.02.2002? If so, what views did you express in
your speech in the Assembly?
Ans. It
may be mentioned here that Shri Rajendrasinh Patel, Congress MLA from Godhra
had made a demand for a compensation of Rs. 2 lakhs to each victim of Godhra
incident. I informed the Assembly that the incident was serious and the Govt.
was considering an ex-gratia payment of Rs.2 lakhs to each victim.
Q.12.
How and when did you reach Godhra on 27.02.2002? Who others accompanied you to
Godhra?
Ans. As
far as I recollect, it was a budget day in the Assembly and the budget was
presented by the Finance Minister. After the Assembly proceedings were completed,
I left for Baroda by a Govt chartered plane. At Baroda, we had requisitioned a
helicopter from ONGC to go to Godhra. Since the helicopter had the limited
seats, my Secretary Shri Aril Mukhim and Shri Jagdish Thakkar, PRO accompanied
me in the helicopter to Godhra. I reached Godhra around 17:00 his or so. At
Godhra helipad I was received by Smt Jayanti Ravi, the then Collector &
District Magistrate, Godhra and some other Govt. officials. To the best of my
recollection, I straight away drove to the scene of incident i.e. Godhra
Railway Station. At Godhra Railway Station, there was a big crowd. The two
burnt bogies had been detached from the train and parked in the railway yard. I
asked the details of the incident from the persons present there and they
briefed me, as to how the incident took place. The dead bodies of the victims
were lying covered in the railway yard. I climbed up in the burnt coach and
inspected the scene of occurrence. The crowd present over there was aggravated
and expected from the Govt that the culprits should be punished at the
earliest. I assured the crowd that the culprits would be brought to book and
that they should maintain the peace. Thereafter, I went to Civil Hospital and
saw the injured admitted over there. I talked to some of them and assured them
all help and best treatment. I also asked them about the details of the
incident and their version almost tallied with the version given by the persons
present at the Railway Station. From Civil Hospital, I went to CoIlectorate and
held a meeting with the Govt. and police officials. I asked them about the
details of the incident. At that time, Shri Ashok Bhatt, the then Health
Minister, Shri Gordhan Zadafia, the then Home Minister were also present there.
Shri Prabhatsinh Chauhan, the then Transport Minister had also reached Godhra
and met me there, but I do not remember whether he was present in the
Collectorate or not.
[Sanjeev:
The idea that Modi could have deduced the cause of the fire from cursory
conversations with those affected is absurd. The precise (technical) nature of
the actual fire is completely contrary to ‘official’ accounts, and Modi
prevented data from being collected by letting the bogies be sent away, the
post mortem being conducted badly, etc.]
EVIDENCE
THAT PROVES MODI TRIED TO DERAIL SIT
Zakia
Jafri’s written statement to the court on 18 September 2013 against Narendra
Modi
5.
Cynically, and illegally allowed Post Mortems Illegally out in the Open at
the Railway Yard, Godhra where the burnt and mutilated corpses were laid in
full view of an aggressive and irate crowd of RSS and VHP men and women, who
were gathered there in violation of Curfew Orders @ Godhra. Deliberately
allowing photographs of the burnt corpses to be taken and widely circulated
by the RSS-VHP and media in general, despite it being prevented under law;
6.
Personally instigating individual RSS-VHP men and women at the railway yard
at Godhra assuring them that enough time will be allowed by the Modi-led
government and administration to extract a revenge for Godhra.
|
Q.13.
Who took the decision for the transportation of dead bodies to Ahmedabad and on
what basis?
Ans. In
the meeting held at Collectorate, a collective decision was taken in
consultation with all those present there to transport the dead bodies of the
victims to Ahmedabad. I instructed that the dead bodies should be kept at Sola
Civil Hospital on the outskirts of Ahmedabad so that the tension should not
mount. This decision was taken in the light of the fact that it was learnt that
most of the victims belonged to Ahmedabad and other places beyond Ahmedabad and
that their relatives need not come to Godhra for their identification and
claiming the dead bodies, as Godhra town was under curfew.
[Sanjeev: It is very convenient for Modi to pretend that
this was a collective decision. Such action is both unlawful and inflammatory.
It is clear that VHP was an ACTIVE PART of official deliberations that day.]
EVIDENCE
THAT PROVES THAT WITHOUT MODI’S CONSENT THIS COULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED
Zakia
Jafri’s written statement to the court on 18 September 2013 against Narendra
Modi
7.
Directing that the unidentified bodies of Godhra train victims should be
handed over to Jaideep Patel, a non-governmental person, that too belonging
to a supremacist and communal VHP to be brought to Ahmedabad where aggressive
funeral processions in full public view were allowed. Modi directed this at a
meeting at the Collectorate in the evening of 27.2.2002 before he returned to
Gandhinagar.
Jaideep
Patel was allowed to be present at an official meeting at the Collectorate.
Jaideep
Patel is a co-conspirator and also facing trial for mass crimes in the
ongoing Naroda Gaam case.
Modi is
specifically guilty of allowing the escalation of violence from Godhra to
other parts of Gujarat and taking decisions contrary to law.
|
EVIDENCE
THAT PROVES THAT MODI AND PATEL NOT ONLY MET BUT HAD KEY MEETING IN GODHRA ON
27 FEBRUARY 2002
Mini
cabinet meeting at the Godhra Collectorate with A-1 Narendra Modi, 2
ministers at least from the cabinet, go A-5 Gordhan Zadaphiya and
co-A-4 Prabhatsinh Chauhan also present. A-21 Jaideep Patel is also
allowed to remain present at this official meeting according to the
statement given by DM, Jayanti Ravi to the SIT.
SIT
admits at Page 60 in its final report dated 8.2.2012 that Mrs Jayanti Ravi has
stated that in the meeting held at the Collectorate, A-21 Mr Jaideep
Patel, a VHP leader was also present.
[Source]
|
Q.14.
Did Smt. Jayanti Ravi, the then Collector, Godhra object to the transportation
of the dead-bodies to Ahmedabad?
Ans. It
was a unanimous decision in the meeting to take dead bodies to Sola Civil
Hospital, Ahmedabad, as most of the victims belonged to Ahmedabad and nearby
places. Further, Smt Jayanti Ravi, the then Collector District Magistrate
Godhra was of the view that the dead bodies should be immediately taken from
Godhra as the same would have mounted further tension in Godhra city.
[Sanjeev: It is absurd to take this excuse. Advice
in such matters can be readily obtained from the Divisional Commissioner/Home
Secretary by the DM. The DM is duty bound to CONTROL the law and order
situation, not to pass it on to others]
EVIDENCE
THAT PROVES MODI IS LYING
In the
context of the Godhra incident, the SIT betrayed a bias in distancing Modi
from a shocking piece of evidence: the illegal letter handing over the
custody of 54 bodies to a VHP leader, in the face of the Bandh called by that
organization in an incendiary environment.
|
Q.15
Did you know Shri Jaydeep Patel, the then VHP General Secretary and whether he
met you at Godhra and made a request that he should be allowed to accompany the
dead bodies to Ahmedabad?
Ans. I
know Jaydeep Patel, the then VHP General Secretary. I do not remember to have
met him at Godhra.
[Sanjeev: This
is a blatant lie, and Modi also kept talking to Patel the whole day over phone.]
After
the decision was taken to transport the dead bodies to Ahmedabad, it was the
duty of the District Administration to chalk out the modalities for its
transportation.
[Sanjeev:
This is again passing the buck, after he was DIRECTLY involved in the decision,
and was obliged to explain how VHP could possibly take charge of such bodies]
I
do not know the details, as to how and when the dead bodies reached Ahmedabad.
[Sanjeev: This is again an absurd lie!]
However,
the custody of the dead bodies remained with the District Administration,
police officers and the hospital authorities.
EVIDENCE
THAT PROVES MODI IS LYING
Zakia
Jafri’s written statement to the court on 18 September 2013 against Narendra
Modi
Curfew was
deliberately not imposed at Ahmedabad while over
3,000 RSS workers were allowed to gather at the Sola Civil Hospital where
Jaideep Patel arrived with the bodies of the Godhra victims at about 4 a.m.
The crowd was aggressive and violent as proved from the police control room
records. No steps were taken to disperse the crowd that attacked the hospital
staff and doctors, a High Court judge,
Violent funeral processions were allowed to wind
through the streets of Ahmedabad for several hours at two locations; worst Acharya
Giriraj Kishore was given police escort to come and further provoke the
aggressive mob; the cremations took place only in the evening and attacks on
Naroda Patiya, Naroda Gaam and Gulberg Society where over 200 persons were
massacred (and rapes allowed) in broad daylight on the same day, 28.2.2002,
while violent and aggressive funeral processions
were willfully allowed by Modi and the
police and administration.
|
Q.16.
Did you meet the media persons at Godhra?
Ans. While,
I was at Collectorate, Godhra, a lot of press reporters and media persons had
assembled there. I briefed them about the incident and informed them that the
culprits would not be spared and that a compensation of two lakhs per victim
would be paid. I also appealed to public through them for maintenance of peace.
I also informed the media that on the basis of facts narrated to me by the
persons present on the spot as well as injured persons the incident appeared to
be a serious and preplanned conspiracy.
Q.17.
How and when did you return to Ahmedabad? Who were the persons who had stayed
back at Godhra and who accompanied you back to Ahmedabad?
Ans. I
started from Godhra by road around 19:30 hrs along with Shri Anil Mukim and
Shri Jagdish Thakkar. From Baroda, I came to Ahmedabad by chartered aircraft.
From Ahmedabad, I came to Gandhinagar and reached my residence at about 22:30
hrs.
0.18.
On your return from Godhra on 27.02.2002, did you call for a meeting for the review
of the situation including law and order and repercussions of the Godhra train
burning incident?
Ans. On
my return to my residence, I called for a Law & Order meeting, which was
attended by the top officials of Administration, Home and Police department.
Q.19.
When and where did the aforesaid meeting on 27.02.2002 take place? Who all were
present in the said meeting? Who were the Ministers/MLAs present in the
meeting?
Ans. The
meeting took place at my residence office for about half an hour. Smt. Swarna
Kante Varma, the then acting Chief Secretary Shri Ashok Narayan, the then ACS
(Home), Shri K. Chakravarthi, the then DGP, Shri P C Pande, the then CP,
Ahmedabad City, Shri K Nityanandam, the then Home Secretary, Dr P.K. Mishra and
my other PS Shri Anil Mukim were present in the meeting As far as I recollect,
Shri G.C Raiger, the then ADG (Int.) was not present. Shri Sanjeev Bhatt, the
then DC (Int) did not attend, as this was a high level meeting. None of my
Cabinet colleagues were present in the said meeting.
[Sanjeev: This is one of the most serious lapses in the
entire process, where proper minutes were not maintained of this meeting.
Surely a deliberate ploy. Even attendance was not noted. I don’t think this is
possible without deliberate intent to mislead the country in the future.]
EVIDENCE
THAT PROVES THAT MODI IS LYING
Zakia
Jafri’s written statement to the court on 18 September 2013 against Narendra
Modi
8.
Specifically instructing his top policemen and administrators not to act
evenhandedly in the days to follow and “allow Hindus to vent their anger.” Two senior bureaucrats
present at the meeting have stated that cabinet ministers were present at a
meeting that went on well past midnight. Haren Pandya, a minister in
Modi’s cabinet in 2002 had given evidence of this to the Concerned Citizen’s
Tribunal headed by Justice Krishna Iyer and PB Sawant in 2002 itself. Later
in 2009 a serving officer from the state intelligence, Sanjiv Bhatt also gave
the same evidence before the SIT and the Supreme Court.
|
IN ANY
EVENT THIS CAN BE ONLY DETERMINED IN COURT
Ramachandran
said that Bhatt’s testimony was enough to put Modi on trial, where witnesses
would have been subjected to cross-examination.
[Sanjeev: I have personally no doubt about Sanjiv Bhatt’s claims.
Modi LIED about the presence of Jaideep Patel - despite a clear
statement from the Deputy Commissioner. Modi is not believable. There is
plenty of reason to suspect those officers present who did not support Sanjiv
(they were all rewareded with sinecures by Modi].
|
Q.20.
What were the discussions held in the said meeting of 27 02.2002 night? Please
give an exact account of the views and suggestions given by each participant?
Ans. In
the meeting, I shared information about my visit to Godhra. The officers
present briefed me about the precautionary measures taken by them I issued
instructions to them to take all possible steps to maintain Law & Order and
peace. I also asked ACS (Home) to make inquiry in the local Army headquarter
about the availability of Army personnel. I asked them to seek assistance for
additional force from neighboring states. I instructed the officials of Home
Department and police to make necessary bandobast to avoid untoward incident.
It may be added here that by that time I had been informed about the Gujarat
bandh call given by the VHP on 28-2-2002.
[Sanjeev: Since there are no minutes, it is impossible
to believe the liar Modi]
Q.21.
Did you tell the police officers as well as the officials of Home Department
that "In communal riots police takes action against Hindus and Muslims on
one-to-one basis. This will not do now, allow Hindus to give vent to their
anger"? If so, what was the reaction of the officers of the Home
Department and police officers present in the meeting?
Ans. It
is baseless allegation. On the contrary, I had given categorical and clear cut
instructions to maintain peace and communal harmony at any cost. A similar
appeal had earlier been made to the people at Godhra through media.
[Sanjeev:
We have a situation where two honest IPS officers are making statements under
oath about a well-known liar. Whom can one believe?]
EVIDENCE
THAT PROVES THAT MODI IS LYING
Sanjiv
Bhatt, the Deputy Commissioner of Police in 2002, had alleged that Mr Modi
told police officers during the riots, "For too long the Gujarat Police
had been following the principle of balancing the actions against the Hindus
and Muslims while dealing with the communal riots in Gujarat. This time the
situation warranted that the Muslims be taught a lesson to ensure that such
incidents do not recur again."
This allegation was supported by former Gujarat Additional Director General of Police RB Sreekumar, who told the Nanawati commission, "In communal riots police takes action against Hindus and Muslims on one-to-one basis. This will not do now - allow Hindus to give vent to their anger" |
Q
22. Did Shri P.C. Pande, the then Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad City
protest against the decision taken by the Govt. about the transportation of
dead-bodies to Ahmedabad? If so, what was your reaction?
Ans. No
such discussions took place with Shri P.C. Pande.
EVIDENCE
THAT PROVES THAT MODI IS LYING
Q:
Against the advice of …?
A:
Against the advice of police officials; against the intelligence.
“Please don’t get the dead bodies as there was bandh call.” You are creating
a situation whereby the police is asked to look the other way letting lumpen
elements and goons getting a free hand. There was tremendous grief and anger.
Yes army was called within three days and intensity of violence came down in
urban areas like Ahmedabad, Baroda. But it spread to rural areas, the tribal
belt.
Godhra
should not have happened. It happened under Modi’s watch. Why was police not
present at the Godhra railway station when kar sevaks were coming in the
morning? Under normal operating procedure police bandobast had to be there
when such groups were coming. Local police should have come on their own. Why
didn’t they? It happened under your (Modi) watch and you are directly
responsible, not vicariously.
Everyone
talks about post Godhra. Talk about Godhra. Once the Godhra happened it was
Modi’s duty to see that violence did not spread and contained quickly. Though
local administration could be blamed where Modi gets the blame is post
Godhra. He as chief minister should have taken immediate steps given the
potential of incident snow-balling. It ought to have been tackled in Godhra
itself.
Q:
So it turned into a tinderbox?
A:
This is what PC Pandey told him. He used the word ‘tinder box’. If you
get the dead bodies to Ahmedabad it will turn into a virtual tinder box. That
is what he said in so many words.
|
EVIDENCE
THAT PROVES THAT MODI IS LYING
I would
also like to bring to your notice the deposition of Shri P C Pande, the then
Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad City, before Justice Nanavati Commission on
18th August 2004. For your perusal the relevant portions are reproduced below:
“…..
had not taken the decision of bringing the dead bodies to Ahmedabad. As I believe
that the decision might have taken at the top level in the Government and it
has not necessary for me to interfere in that decision……”
“….. When I know that about 58 bodies were being brought
to Ahmedabad or that they have already brought, at that time, I had a feeling
that looking to the communal situation of Ahmedabad, it is … sensitive and
like a Tinder Box and therefore, in the prevailing circumstances, if these
dead bodies are brought to Ahmedabad, then
possibly it will create serious impacts…”
ACS Home
Shri Ashok Narayan, in his cross examination before the Nanavati Commission
had also confirmed that decision to bring dead bodies to Ahmedabad city was taken at higher level. In
this higher level above him are the Chief Secretary, MOS Home and CM. [Source]
|
0.23.
What were the intelligence inputs received by the SIB about the likely
repercussions of Godhra incidents on 27.02.2002? Did SIB report these inputs to
the Government? If so, whether these inputs were shared by the Government with
the jurisdictional officers of the police?
Ans. I
am not aware about any SIB inputs. However, during the meeting on 27-22002,
officers expressed their views about tense atmosphere and I had already
instructed all concerned to take necessary action to maintain Law & Order
in the State.
0.24
Who gave the call for Gujarat Bandh on 28.02.2002 and Bharat Bandh on 01.03.2002?
Were these bandh supported by the ruling party?
Ans. On
27-2-2002, I remained busy through out the day and also visited Godhra In the
night only, I had come to know that bandh call had been given by VHP. However,
on 28-2-2002, I came to know from news paper reports that the bandh had been
supported by BJP.
[Sanjeev:
How very convenient. Modi’s BJP supports the Bandh and he pretends it was
someone else. Modi was an active accomplice. Without his permission, the ruling
BJP would NEVER have supported VHP’s call!]
Q.25.
Did you hold a law and order review meeting on 28.02.2002 morning? If so, who
all attended the said meeting? What were the issues discussed in the said
meeting?
Ans. On
28-2-2002, the Assembly was in the morning session. In this session, which
lasted for 10 minutes, homage was paid and silence observed in the memory of
victims of Godhra incident and the house adjourned around 08:40 hrs. In my
speech in the Assembly, I had ordered for Judicial Inquiry by a Commission into
the incident. After the Assembly, I attended a Cabinet meeting. Thereafter, I
held a Law & Order review meeting. In this meeting, I was informed that no
Army was available in Ahmedabad cantonment. I immediately spoke to Union Home
Minister Shri L.K. Advani and requested him that necessary arrangements be made
for the Army to reach Gujarat urgently. This meeting was attended by the
officials of Home and police department, who had attended the meeting the
previous night.
0.26.
Did Shri Ashok Bhatt, the then Health Minister and Shri I. K. Jadeja, the then
Minister of Urban Development attend the said meeting?
Ans. Both
these Ministers must have attended the Cabinet meeting but they were not
present in the Law & Order meeting, as it was not their subject.
Q.27.
Did you take a decision to allow Shri Ashok Bhatt and Shri I.K. Jadeja to sit
in the State Control Room and Ahmedabad City Control Room, respectively which
adversely affected the supervision of the riot situation by DGP and CP,
Ahmedabad City respectively?
Ans. No
such decision was taken and no such discussions took place in the meeting.
Subsequently, I came to know about this allegation from media. However, I do
not have any personal knowledge about the positioning of these two Ministers in
the two Control Rooms.
[Sanjeev:
So what exactly did he know, as Home Minister? Was he the world’s most
incompetent Chief Minister?]
0.28.
What were your movements on 28.02.2002? Please give details of the same.
Ans. On
28-2-2002 I met the press at Circuit House Annexe Shahigaug. I informed the
media about the announcement of an inquiry commission by Govt. and also made an
appeal to the general public through them to maintain peace and communal
harmony. It may be added here that on 28-2-2002 itself, I had got recorded a
message for the general public to maintain peace and harmony, which was
continuously broadcasted on the Doordarshan.
0.29.
Is it correct that the Army was requisitioned on 28.02 2002 itself and several
Columns had been airlifted on 28.02 2002 night & 1-3-2002 onwards but were
deployed only on 02.03.2002?
Ans. In
response to the request made by me to the Union Home Minister the Army was
airlifted and had started arriving from 28-2-2002 night and 1-3-2002 morning. I
had asked administration to requisition Army and immediately deploy. As far as
I recollect, the Army was deployed with effect from 1-3-2002 itself. In fact at
my request, Shri George Fernandes, the then Union Defence Minister had visited
Ahmedabad on 1-3-2002.
Q.30.
Did you make a statement in the Star News on 02.03.2002 to the effect that the
Gujaras was well on the road to peace and normalcy and normalcy is slowly
returning here and that Ahmedabad too had been largely peaceful since last
night despite the fact that the riots were continuing in Panchmahal, Mehsana,
Kheda, Nadiad and Bhavnagar districts of Gujarat?
Ans. It
may be stated here that I used to meet the press almost daily evening and made
statements on the basis of data facts and figures made available to me by the
Home Department. It is a fact that I used to appeal for peace and also
highlighted the peaceful areas of the State.
Q.31.
Did you receive any information about an attack by a mob on the Gulberg
Society? It so, when and through whom? What action did you take in the matter?
Ans. To
the best of my recollection, I was informed in the Law & Order review
--meeting held in the night about the attack on Gulberg society in
Meghanincigar area and Naroda Patiya.
Q.32.
Did you know Late Ahesan Jafri, Ex-MP, who was residing in Gulberg society?
Ans. I
had not known Late Ahesan Jafri, Ex-MP, as he was elected as MP sometime in
1970's, when I was not even in politics. I was told subsequently that Late
Ahesan Jafri, Ex-MP was residing in Gulberg society and had been killed during
the attack on the society.
Q.33.
Did late Ahesan Jafri, ex-MP himself contact you over phone and request for
help? If so, what was the action taken by you?
Ans. In
this connection, I would like to add here that no such phone call had been
received by me.
[Sanjeev:
This is a blatant lie and could have been easily verified by SIT through phone
records. Why was this not done?]
Q
34 Did you visit Gulberg Society on or around 03 03 2002 along with one
Jegrupsinn Rajput and others including Ministers? If so, please describe your
visit and the scenario over there
Ans. I
visited Gulberg society, Naroda Patiya and other riot affected parts of the
Ahmedabad City on 5-3-2002 and 6-3-2002. During these visits, I had also
visited different relief camps. Shri Jagrupsinh Rajput was a Congress leader at
that time and he did not accompany me. However, I do not know, who were the
persons present there. I did not meet anyone.
EVIDENCE
OF POLICE COMPLICITY IN NARODA PATIYA
In Naroda
Patiya, the uniformed personnel drove Muslims away when they had sought
shelter in a sprawling police campus. In both cases, victims legally
testified that at the time of the killings, the police either looked the
other way or aided the miscreants.
|
Q.35.
Please narrate the details of the efforts made by you to bring peace and
normalcy in the State.
Ans. Regular
appeals were made through media to maintain peace and communal harmony. Peace
committee meetings were held in all the police stations. It may be added here
that I had formed a committee under the ChairmAns. hip
of Governor of State with Congress President, Shri Amarsingh Chaudhanj, Ex-CM,
Shri Naresh Ravel, leader of the opposition, Shri Keshubhai Patel, Ex-CM, Smt
Ilaben Bhatt, SEWA, Padmashri Ishvarbhai Patel, a known Gandhian from Sabarmati
Aashram, myself and some other leading social workers as members to supervise
the relief operations
Q.36.
What was the action taken by the Government to rehabilitate the riot victims?
How much compensation was announced for the post Godhra riot victims?
Ans. Relief
camps were opened in the affected areas and they were served by the NGOs and
local social leaders. The Govt. contributed funds as per policy and the relief
operations were supervised by the Samiti. The necessary food, drinking water,
medicines, and cash doles, etc. arrangements were made in these camps.
Arrangements were also made for the children's education in these camps.
[Sanjeev: These are the same camps which remained in a
deplorable condition and where Modi said that Muslims were child producing
factories?]
In
this connection, I would like to point out that some PIL was filed in Gujarat
High Court and the judgment pronounced by the High Court may be looked into.
Q.37.
When was Shri K.P.S. Gill, former DG of Punjab, appointed as an Advisor io the
Chief Minister and when did he arrive in Gujarat? Please give the details of
your meetings with him. What were the suggestions given by Shri K. P. S. Gill
to bring normalcy and peace in the State?
Ans. Shri
K.P.S. Gill, former DGP of Punjab, who was neither a Hindu nor a Muslim and
being an experienced police officer was invited to give useful suggestions to
improve the situation in the Stale. Shri K.P.S. Gill held a number of meetings
with the officials of Home and Police Department, as well as the leaders of
Hindu and Muslim communities. After taking stock of the situation Shri K P.S.
Gill had advised me to transfer the jurisdictional officers. In view of his
suggestion, all police officers were transferred.
0.38
Why was Shri G. C. Raiger, Addl DG (Intelligence) transferred in the first week
of 2002 and Shri P B. Sreekumar, Add! DG (Armed Units) posted in his place?
Ans. I
had not known Shri R B. Sreekumar before his appointment as Addl DC (Int ). The
Home Department had put up a proposal about his appointment as Addl DG Int. ),
which was approved by me. There was no particular reason for the transfer of
Shri G.C. Raiger, Addl. DG (Int.)
Q.39.
After taking over as Addl.DG (Intelligence) did Shri R. B. Sreekumar send any
intelligence report to the Government about the possible communal violence in
Ahmedabad City. If so, please give the details of the same.
Ans. He
might have sent such report to either DGP or ACS (Home). I do not recollect to
have seen any such report.
Q.40.
Please see a copy of DO letter dated 19.04_2002 addressed by Shri P. C Pande,
the then Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad City to DGP with a copy to Addl DG
(Intelligence) and ACS (Home) about the alleged involvement of Shri Bharat
Barot, a Minister in the Government in a rioting incident. Was this letter
brought to your notice? If so, what was the action taken by you in the matter?
Ans. Shri
Ashok Narayan, the then ACS (Home) had brought this matter orally to my notice
and i had reiterated my earlier instruction to the concerned
Q.41.
Please see a copy of the DO letter dated 22.04.2002 addressed by Shri P. C.
Pande, the then CP Ahmedabad City with a copy to DGP and Addl.DG (Intelligence)
about the undesirable activities of Sang Parivar activists. Was this matter
brought to your notice? If so, what was the action taken by you in the matter?
Ans. In
this connection, it is stated that I do not remember now, whether this issue
was brought to my notice or not. But, it has been my and my Government's
approach right from the first day, that a culprit is a culprit irrespective of
his caste, creed, religion or socio political background, as nobody is above
law.
[Sanjeev:
This is completely contrary to the Modi’s active shielding of VHP/BJP killers]
EVIDENCE
THAT PROVES MODI IS LYING
Zakia
Jafri’s written statement to the court on 18 September 2013 against Narendra
Modi
13.
Partisan prosecutors belonging to the RSS-VHP were appointed to ensure that
cases were killed in their infancy; bail was easily granted to powerful
accused until the Supreme Court stepped in, in 2003 and 2004. Two trials, the
Best Bakery trial and the Bilkees Bano cases were transferred out of the
state.
|
Q.42.
Please see a copy of the DO letter dated 24.04.2002 sent by Shri R. B.
Sreekumar, the then Addl. DG (Intelligence) to ACS (Home) with a copy to DGP
regarding the current communal scenario in Ahmedabad City. Was this letter
brought to your notice? If so, what was the action taken by you in the matter?
Ans. No
such letter was ever put to me and Shri Ashok Narayan, the then ACS (Home)
never orally briefed me about it. However, it may be mentioned here that during
March- April, 2002, elections were held in 1700 panchayat of State peacefully,
around 5000 Haj pilgrims who had arrived in the State were welcomed at their
respective places, various examinations were held peacefully In view of this,
the claim of Shri R.B Sreekumar, the then Addl DG (Int.) that the Muslims had
lost faith in the administration, police and judiciary does not seem to be
sound.
Q43
Please see a copy of law and order assessment report sent by Shri R Sreekumar,
the then Addl. DG (Intelligence) to Shri P S Shah, the then Addl Secretary Law
& Order) regarding cancellation of Rath Yatra in July 2002 till an
atmosphere of durable peace and goodwill between the majority and minority
communities was established. Was this letter brought to your notice? If so,
what was the action taken by you in the matter? Did you agree with the view of
ADG (Int.)?
Ans. Yes.
This matter was brought my notice by Shri Ashok Narayan, the then ACS (Home). I
asked Shri Ashok Narayan, the then ACS (Home) as to whether there was anything
specific or it was a general perception of Shri R.B. Sreekumar, the then AddI.DG
(Int ). Shri Ashok Narayan, the then ACS (Home) informed me that Shri Sreekumar
had not cited any specific instance but his report was general in nature. In
view of this, I did not agree with the views of Shri R.B. Sreekumar, the then
AddI.DG (Int.) Rath-Yatra took place on 12-7-2002, and the event passed of
peacefully. All this goes to show that the apprehensions were without any
basis.
Q.44.
Did your Cabinet Colleagues namely Shri Haren Pandya, the then Minister for
Revenue, Shri Ashok Bhatt, the then Health Minister led the mobs in Ahmedabad
with Shri Bharat Barot, a sitting MLA was at the forefront?
Ans. This
is absolutely incorrect. There was no such instance like that.
Q.45
Did Shri Nitinbhai Patel and Shri Narayan Lallu Patel, the then sitting Ministers
the Gujarat government led violence, arson and even sexual violence against
women in Kadi and Unjha in Mehsana district respectively?
Ans. This
is absurd. No such incidents had ever taken place.
Q.46.
Did you let off your escort in the evening on 28.02.2002 and visit Naroda
Patiya to congratulate the accused persons for committing heinous crime?
Ans. This
is absolutely false. On 28-2-2002 evening, I held a press conference at Circuit
House, Annexe, Shahibaug and thereafter, returned to Gandhinagar The allegation
has been maliciously made against me.
Q.47.
Did the Government submit the false report to the Election Commission, in which
it was reflected that the law and order situation in the Gujarat was normal and
that a co-ordial atmosphere existed for holding the elections in the State?
Ans. It
is incorrect to say that the Govt. submitted a false report to the Election
Commission. It may be mentioned here that even before August, 2002, Panchayat
elections for about 1700 panchayat were held peacefully in the months of March
April, 2002 and the next Assembly elections were held in December, 2002 and
that too peacefully. In view of this, this allegation is far from truth.
Q.48
Did you try to influence Shri R.B. Sreekumar through Shri Dinesh Kapadia to
depose in favour of the Government before Nanavati Commission of Inquiry?
Ans. This
allegation is funny in as much as the junior employee had been sponsored by the
Govt. to influence an Addl. DG. The allegation is false and without any basis.
Q.49
Did you ask Shri G. C. Murmu, Secretary, (Law and Order) Home Department and
Shri Arvind Pandya, Government Advocate to brief Shri R B. Sreekumar before his
deposition in Nanavati Commission of Inquiry and also to influence the latter
for not making any deposition against the Government?
Ans. No.
This allegation is also false and baseless.
Q.50
Kindly see a letter dated 20-8-2002 of Shri R B. Sreekumar, the then Addl.DG
(Int.) addressed to ACS (Home) regarding the current Law & Order situation
in Gujarat State. Was this letter put up to you by the Home Department? If so,
what was the action taken by you?
Ans. No
such letter was shown to me. ACS (Home) did not briefed me orally also about
any such reference received from Shri R B. Sreekumar the then Addl. DG (Int.).
Q.51.
Kindly see a letter dated 28-8-2002 of Shri R.B. Sreekumar, the then Addl DG
(Int.) addressed to ACS (Home) regarding the emerging Law & Order
trends-run up to the assembly poll in Gujarat State. Was this letter put up to
you by the Home Department? If so, what was the action taken by you?
Ans. No
such letter was shown to me. ACS (Home) did not brief me orally also about any
such reference received from Shri R.8'. Sreekumar, the then Addl.DG
Q.52.
Please see a text of the public speech delivered by you at Becharaji, Mehasana
District on 9-9-2002, as a part of Gaurav Yatra. Particularly the portion
reproduced below:
"What
brother, should we run relief camps? (Referring to relief camps for riot
affected Muslims). Should I start children producing centers there, i.e relief
camps? We want to achieve progress by pursuing the policy of family planning
with determination. We are 5 and our 25!! (Ame panch, Amara panch,
referring the Muslim polygamy). On whose name such a development is
pursued? Can't Gujarat implement family planning? Whose inhibitions are coming
in our way? Which religious sect is coming in the way? Why money is not
reaching to the poor? If some people go on producing children, the children
will do cycle puncture repair only?"
Did
these remarks refer to the Muslims?
Ans. This
speech does not refer to any particular community or religion This was a
political speech, in which I tried to point out the increasing population of
India, in as much as I stated that "Can't Gujarat implement family
planning?" My speech had been distorted by some interested elements who
had misinterpreted to suit their designs. It may be mentioned here that no
riots or tension took place after my election speech.
[Sanjeev:
this is the portion where he talks about child-producing factories. He did not
deny it.]
53.
Did you ask the ACS (Home) to get a denial issued from SIB on 15-9-2002,
regarding their report sent to DGP about your speech at Becharaji?
Ans. No
such instructions were given by me to ACS (Home).
Q
54 Is it correct that when Shri R.B. Sreekumar, the then Addl DG (Int.) refused
to issue the denial, he was ordered to be transferred by you as ADG (Police
Reforms) cn 17-9-2002?
Ans. The
allegation leveled by Shri R.B. Sreekumar, the then Addl.DG (Int ) is not
correct, in as much as this was a routine transfer, for which the proposal had
been received from the Home Department
[Sanjeev:
why was he transferred within months of his posting? That’s not “routine” – and
his Home department was run by him, anyway]
0.55.
Please see the entries made by Shri R.B. Sreekumar, the then Addl.DG (Int.) on
16-4-2C.02, 17-4-2002, 18-4-2002, 28-4-2002, 30-4-2002, 7-5-2002, 29-52002,
25-6-2002, 28-6-2002, 1-7-2002, 26-8-2002, 2-9-2002 and 15-9-2002 and confirm
the authenticity of the same.
Ans. I
do not have any knowledge about such a personal diary/register maintained by
Shri R.B. Sreekumar, the then Addl.DG (Int.). I came to know about his diary
from media reports after a long time. In view of the fact that this diary was
not a Govt. record, I do not want to comment upon the authenticity or otherwise
of the same.
Q.56.
Did you ever use the mobile phones of your personal staff, namely Shri Anil
Mukim, the then Addl. PS to CM, Shri Tanmay Mehta, PA to CM, Shri Sanjay
Bhaysar, OSD and Shri 0.P.Singh, PA to CM?
Ans. Telephones
are installed at my residence as well as my office. Whenever, I go out,
telephones are available to me. I have never used the mobile phones of my
personal staff at headquarters. There was a mobile phone allotted to me in the
year 2002, but I rarely used the same. I do not recollect its number.
Q.57.
Whether Jaydeep Patel, Babu Bajrangi and Dr. Mayaben Kodnani, MLA were in touch
with you during the riots from 28-2-2002 onwards?
Ans. t
came to know Babu Bajrangi through media reports and he is not known to me. Dr.
Mayaben Kodnani is a MLA from BJP and used to meet me. Jaydeep Patel is a VHP
leader, who is also known to me. As far as I recollect, they never contacted me
over phone during the riots.
[Sanjeev: SIT was obliged to check phone records and
then ask Modi to accept or deny.]
Q.58
Please see the interviews given by Shri Haresh Bhatt, the then MLA Babu
Bajrangi, Rajendra Vyas, VHP President, Ahmedabad City to Shri Ashish Khetan,
Special Correspondence. Tehlaka and published in the Special issue of Tehlaka
dated 3-11-2007 and confirm the contents thereof
Ans. The
allegations leveled against me by any of the aforesaid persons are false and
incorrect. It may be added here that this particular issue was raised in
November, 2007 through Teheika magazine after about six years of the incident
and that too at the time of elections that were held in December, 2007. These
issues were again raked up when the SIT was appointed by the Hon'ble Supreme
Court of India in April, 2008. This issue was again raised in this week on
22-3-2010, when I was to appear before the SIT for my examination. In view of
all these factors, I would say that the whole episode is motivated and stage
managed. I have no personal knowledge about authenticity of the said CD.
0.59.
Please see volume-1 & 11 of the book titled Crime Against Humanity
published by Concerned Citizen Tribunal-2002. Did the Concerned Citizen
Tribunal forward their recommendations to the Govt. of Gujarat and ask for the
Government's views in the matter? Did the Govt. of Gujarat respond to this
communication? If not, why not?
Ans. I
do not know anything about these two books and they never came to my notice.
Q.60.
Please see a copy of the extracts of news item published in the Outlook
magazine dated 3-6-2002, which says that the senior bureaucrats and police
officers were summoned by the CM on 27-2-2002 and instructed that there would
be justice for Godhra the next day during the VHP call bandh and that the
police should not come in the way of Hindu backlash. Please confirm the
authenticity of this news item. In case the news was incorrect, was any
contradiction issue by the State Govt. if, not, why not?
Ans. I
have not come across this article. After going through this article today
I find that there are many inaccuracies in the same, in as much as Shri G.
Subba Rao, the then Chief Secretary, Shri G.C. Raigar, Addl, DG (Int.) and Shri
A.K. Sharma, PS did not attend this meeting. In view of these inaccuracies,
this article can not be relied upon. I have already clarified that no such
instructions were given by me on 27-2-2002.
Q.
61 Did CM office intervene into a case of rioting in which a HOmeGuard
Commandant had been arrested? Is it correct that when Shri Vivek Srivastava,
the then SP, Kutch did not oblige the CM office, he was transferred in March,
2002?
Ans. No.
There is no such instance of any interference by CM office. The
postings/transfers of the police officers are handled by e Home Department in
consultation with the DGP. In case. OM's approval is required the file comes to
me for the approval I do not recollect any such instance and moreover, I never
interfered in such matters.
Q.62.
Were the dead bodies of the Ram-seviks and other persons killed in Godhra
incident paraded in Ahmedabad City?
Ans. The
Govt was very particular that tension should not mount at the time of funeral
of the Godhra victims. As per my information, the police played a proactive
role in the matter and the relatives of the victims were persuaded to take the
dead bodies in vehicles in some cases. The relatives of the victims cooperated
with the administration as a result of which the funeral was peaceful and no
untoward incident took place on the way to the cremation ground. Further, as
per my information even the unidentified bodies were cremated at a distance of
about 200 meters from the Sole Civil Hospital after completing necessary legal
formalities. The allegation is therefore without any basis.
Q.63.
It has been alleged that after the riots the public servants who connived with
those responsible for carnage were doubly rewarded and those who tried to
uphold the rule of law were punished in various ways by way of transfers and
supersessions in promotion and this sent a message to the Govt. functionaries
to be committed to the political agenda of the CM than their constitutional
obligations for which every Govt. servants had taken oath. What have to say?
Ans. The
allegation is vague, false and without any basis. It appears that serious
attempt has been made by the complainant to attribute all the movements in the
Govt. to the Chief Minister. The posting and transfers are the prerogative of
the administrative ministry and a routine affair. In the election year, those
who had completed about three years of stay in a particular post are
transferred by the Govt. itself or otherwise the Election Commission would do
that. In this chain of transfers those who had put in less than three years in
a particular place are also transferred. In view of this, it can not be said
that the posting/ transfers are punitive in nature.
Q.64.
It has further been alleged that Shri Anupam Singh Gehlout, the then SP,
Mehsana District was transferred, as he had refused to toe the Govt. line in a
case in which, prominent persons of Kadi including Ramesh Bachubhai Patel, a
Municipal Councilor were named as accused. What have to say?
Ans. As
already stated postings/transfers are routine administrative matters, which are
dealt with by the concerned Administrative Ministry and my approval is obtained
in routine course. The allegation is therefore without any basis and without
any substance.
Q.65.
What was the compensation fixed for the riot victims of the Godhra incident?
Ans. In
this connection, I may clarify that on 27-2-2002. on the demand of Congress MLA
from Godhra, I had offhand declared an ex-gratia payment of Rs. 2 lakh to each
victim However, after few days, when it was brought to my notice that it was
against the Govt. policy, the matter was immediately rectified end a uniform
compensation of Rs 1.5 lakh each to the victims of Godhra incident as well as
the not victims was announced.
Q
66. It has been alleged by Smt Zakia Naseem that the Govt. of Gujarat had been
utterly secretive about the disbursal of Rs. 150 crore promised by the Prime
Minister Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee for rehabilitation on 4-4-2002 and by this
conduct Shri Narendra Modi had not simply violated the spirit and the law
as laid down by the Indian Constitution but blatantly defied every
constitutional institution including that of the PM and thus, he is accountable
for criminal negligence of duty in failing to provide and relief and
rehabilitation to the victims of carnage in Gujarat. What have to say?
Ans. The
allegation is false, baseless and absurd. I have already stated the efforts
made by the Govt. in rehabilitation of riot victims and that needs no
repetitions.
Q
67. It has been alleged in the complaint that the public prosecutors were
appointed in Gujarat to handle the riot cases were either the members or
supporters and sympathizers of the ruling party or its Sangh Parivar widely
believed to be involved in the carnage and that there was a deliberate attempt
to scuttle most of these cases. What have to say?
Ans. The
procedure with regard to the selection of the public prosecutor is quite
transparent in as much as District Judge writes to the District Collector
regarding the vacancy and the District Collector advertises the post. The
applicants who applied for the post are interviewed by a Committee of District
Judge and a District Collector. On the basis of the interview held a panel of
three advocates for each post is forwarded to the Govt. It is binding upon the
Govt. to appoint an Advocate out of that panel only. It may thus be seen that
the Govt. has no role to play in the selection of a public prosecutor. This
procedure is in vogue since 1960.
Q.68.
It has been alleged in the complaint that those public servants, who toed the
Govt. line were given lucrative post retirement occupation by your Govt. whereas
those who had fallen out were not considered for any post retirement
appointment. What have to say?
Ans. In
this connection, it is stated that there are several posts in the Govt.
institution, in which there is a provision for the employment of the retired
officers for example: Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission, State Election
Commission, State Service Tribunal, Gujarat Public Service Commission. RTI
Commission, State Vigilance Commission. Sales Tax Tribunal, Departmental
Inquiry Officer, etc There is a long list of the departments in which only
retired persons are appointed. My Educational Adviser Shri Kiritbhai Joshi, was
earlier Adviser to Smt Indira Gandhi, the then Prime Minister. Similarly, Shri
Navalawaia, formerly Secretary, Water Resources and Member of UPSC is now my
Adviser on Water Resources. One Shri Bukhari, who was earlier a Govt. officer,
was engaged by me to supervise the relief operations after the communal riots
in 2002. Shri P.0 Pande, formerly DGP, Gujarat State has been appointed as
Hony. Chairman of Police Housing Corporation on a nominal monthly honorarium,
Further, Smt. Maniula Subramanium, IAS, who was formerly in the PMO with either
Late Rajiv Gandhi or Late Narsimha Rao had been appointed as State Vigilance
Commissioner in Gujarat after retirement. This tradition was being followed by
all the State Govts./Central Govt. right after independence The allegation has
no force and has been maliciously leveled against me.
Q.69.
Please refer to your interview given to Shri Sudhir Choudhary of Zee TV on
01-03-2002. In this interview you have stated that "Kriya pratikriya ki
chain chal rahi hai. Hum chhate hain ki-na kriya ho our na pratikriya".
You have also reported!;' stated in the said interview that the Godhra incident
had caused a big shocr in India as well as abroad. These people from Godhra
area have criminal tendencies and had earlier killed lady teachers also and now
they have committed this heinous crime, for which reaction is being felt.
Please explain.
Ans. Those
who have read the history of Gujarat would definitely be aware that communal
violence in Gujarat has a very old history. Since long and even before my
birth, Gujarat has witnessed series of incidents of such communal violence. As
per available history, from 1714 AD to uptill now, in Gujarat, thousands of
incidents of communal violence have been recorded.
So
far as the Zee TV interview of 151 March 2002 is concerned, today, after a
period of eight years, I do not recollect the exact words. But I had always
appealed only and only for peace. I had tried to convey to the people to shun
violence in straight and simple language.
[Sanjeev: This
is a serious matter, why couldn’t SIT simply check from the records?]
If
my words cited in this question are considered in the correct perspective, then
it would be evident that there is a very earnest appeal for refraining from any
kind of violence. I deny all the allegations leveled against me in this regard.
Q.70.
Did you make a. statement to the media about post-Godhra riots by citing
Newton's law that every action has equal and opposite reaction?
Ans. The
Times of India had published a news item purportedly as though I had given an
interview to them. The truth is that nobody from Times of India had met me. The
falsehood of my so-called justification ‘Action -- Reaction Theory' is evident
from this fact. The State Government issued a denial with regard to my not
having given any interview and the same was belatedly published in a remote
corner of the newspaper. There is a saying in Gujarati. "Ver thi er same
nehin". It has been my constant opinion that violence can not be a reply
to violence and I had appealed for peace I had not and would never justify any
action or reaction by a mob against innocents. Hence, I deny all allegations in
this regard
0.71.
Smt Jakia Nasim widow of Late Ahesan Jafri, Ex-MP has alleged in her complaint
that you being a Chief Minister and constitutionally elected head of the State
and responsible for the fundamental rights, right to life and property of all
citizens regardless of caste, community and gender were an architect of a
criminal conspiracy constitutional governance and the rule of law, unleashed,
unlawful and illegal practices during the mass carnage and thereafter
protecting the accused who played direct as well indirect role and abetted the
Commission of Crime. Please comment.
Ans. The
allegations are general in nature, vague, baseless and hence denied. As a Chief
Minister, I have been performing my functions with utmost respect to the Constitution
and Rule of Law. The meeting, to take stock of the situation and review the Law
and Order situation on 27-2-2002, with high officials of the State was my
constitutional duty. On the contrary, for doing my constitutional duty to hold
an emergency review meeting, the complainants are leveling wild allegations of
criminal conspiracy and subversion of rule of law which is nothing, but
vexatious allegations having no basis. I have been lawfully functioning as a CM
and carried out my responsibilities for the safety, security and development of
the people of Gujarat. I have already cleared my stand on the said meeting and
clarified that Law & Order be maintained at all cost. I appealed to people
to maintain harmony. I asked the concerned officials to keep in touch with
local Army authorities. I had held series of such Law and Order review meetings
thereafter and addressed the press also. I had issued press statements
appealing to people to maintain harmony. My appeal to the public to maintain
peace and communal harmony was aired through Doordarshan. I requested both the
Union Home Minister and the Defence Minister to expedite deployment of Army.
Relief and rehabilitation measures were put to operation immediately. All
packages were declared and implemented. Perhaps for the first time in the
Country, a Committee was constituted under the' ChairmAns. hip
of H.E. the Governor to review the rehabilitation efforts. I had already
mentioned about the members of this High level committee which include leader
of the opposition, member from the Chamber of commerce, member from prominent
NGO etc. Also, the allegation of protecting any criminal or accused is
frivolous and without any basis on the history of communal riots in Gujarat for
the first time so many offences have been registered and as of now
comparatively large number of cases have resulted in conviction. The charges
leveled and alleged are therefore, deserved to be dismissed completely and such
false and frivolous complainant should not be entertained.
Read
over and admitted to be correct
Before
me
Before
me
(AK Malhotra)
Member,
SIT,
Gandhinagar
Typed
by
(A.
K. Parmar)
No comments:
Post a Comment