Home Blog Page 3122

As Amit Shah blames ideologically aligned journalists for making the 2002 Gujarat riots worse, here is how they impacted the entire media narrative

Rahul Roushan
-
0
As Amit Shah blames ideologically aligned journalists for making the 2002 Gujarat riots worse, here is how they impacted the entire media narrative

(The following is an extract from the book ‘Sanghi Who Never Went To A Shakha’, and is being republished here in the wake of the recent interview by Amit Shah to ANI. In his interview, Amit Shah said that the riots and circumstances were exacerbated by the efforts of a nexus, which included opposition political parties, politically driven media reporters and journalists, and certain non-governmental organisations. 

Amit Shah stated that all the allegations against the government of Gujarat were fake and fabricated. He said that the sting operation by Tehelka was also fake and ideologically motivated. “All the sting operations were fabricated. The court has itself observed that efforts were made to put a bad tag on the state government. It was we who agreed to constitute the SIT. Why there was no SIT after the 1984 riots in Delhi?” Shah remarked fiercely when asked about the BJP’s denial of the SIT.

Interestingly, all the lies that Amit Shah busted in his interview were peddled by the media and he, in his interview, also mentioned that the riots were made worse by the media. The following excerpt from the book only confirms how the media functions. This experience of the author of the book as a young journalist goes on to confirm how the Lutyens media tried its best, historically, to peddle lies and propaganda to defame Modi and Shah).

Following is the excerpt from the book reprinted here:

The horrific attack on the train at Godhra took place in the morning that day, at around 8 AM. At that time, I was on my way to catch a DTC bus from Ber Sarai to Jhandewalan, where Aaj Tak had their office. By the time I reached, it was already making headlines. The initial news reports didn’t term it as a terror attack or even an incident of violence. Information was still trickling in. I too assumed that it could have been an accident, maybe the pantry car of the train caught fire.

Within an hour, as reporters from Gujarat started sending more information, everyone in the newsroom knew that it was not an accident. As the reporters talked to the authorities and other people who were travelling on the same train, it became clear that the fire was set by a mob. Curious to know the details of what had happened, I filled a paper cup with tea from the vending machine in the office and stood near the desk where a bunch of copy editors typed away information that would be either made into news reports (‘package’ as they were called) or read out by the news anchor, while visuals played on-screen (‘voice-over’).

Copy editors received information from what was known as the ‘input desk’, which in turn got raw information and reports from reporters in the field or from news agencies. I saw one input guy standing next to one such copy editor while the news of the Godhra incident played on the TV sets in the newsroom. Assuming that they will have the latest information, I sneaked up to them and stood there to overhear their conversation as I pretended to watch the news being played on the nearest TV set.

‘Pata chala kaun kiya?’ (‘Do we now know who did it?’), asked the copy editor to the input guy, who immediately replied ‘Musalmaan sab aur kaun?’ (‘The Muslims did it, who else?’) in a hushed but disgusted tone.

After a brief pause, the copy editor said, ‘Ab yeh toh nahi likh sakte na.’ (‘Now, we can’t really write this.’)

I furtively tried to have a look at the input guy. He didn’t say anything after this. Anger was discernible on his face and so was the disgust. His eyes met mine and I immediately averted them, lest he thought I was trying to spy. He then walked away, leaving some fax or photocopies at the desk of the copy editor, presumably the raw reports sent by the reporters from the ground. I too walked back to my desk, silently.

This conversation of barely ten seconds, which would include some uncomfortable pauses too, revealed so much in retrospect. The mainstream can write headlines like ‘Frenzied Hindu mob brings down sixteenth-century mosque’ and ‘Dabang Rajputon ne Dalit dulhe ko ghodi se utaara’ (when some men from the Rajput community force a Dalit groom to alight from the horse during a wedding procession), mentioning the religion or caste of the perpetrator of a reported crime in some cases, but it feels greatly uncomfortable about mentioning the religion when the perpetrator of the crime is a Muslim — this when religion was clearly the main element in the crime committed at Godhra.

‘Muslim mob sets a train carrying Hindu pilgrims on fire’ is not seen as a legitimate or ‘responsible’ headline, even though it is factual. It is a template that Indian journalists have religiously internalized over decades. Any attempt to break away from this template is seen as losing your ‘moral compass’.

Highlighting and shouting about caste is seen as fighting for justice, while hiding and keeping mum about religion is seen as indulging in responsible behaviour, except of course when the religion of the perpetrator is Hindu and the victim a Muslim. In which case, the same journalists shout with double the intensity and even exaggerate the incident with made-up claims about ‘beef’ and ‘Jai Shri Ram’ slogans.

This unwritten rule or the moral compass of the Indian mainstream media ensures that we grow up with a strongly ingrained belief that a Hindu cannot be a victim of any injustice or hate crime, unless he belongs to the so-called lower castes (and in that case the perpetrator has to be a Hindu too). The Hindu–Muslim relationship in this country has been presented as that of the oppressor-oppressed, where Hindus by default are the oppressors.

This induces an element of guilt in an average Hindu, who tries to go an extra mile to appease and accommodate Muslims, including and invariably the ones with an Islamist mindset. That’s what we saw when thousands of Hindus came out in the streets to oppose the CAA, standing shoulder to shoulder with those who idolized Jinnah and the leader of the Moplah massacre.

I can literally give hundreds of examples from just the past few years where the Indian mainstream media has indulged in such glaring double standards, and this is in the era of social media where people have other means to know the ugly truth. You can imagine how skewed the reporting and beliefs would have been almost two decades earlier. This is the ‘truth’ that was fed to unsuspecting consumers by the media, and when people started speaking up and show showing the other side, the media talking heads invented the term ‘post truth’.

For now, I’ll go back to 27 February 2002 and that moment in the newsroom. The conversation between the copy editor and the input guy, which lasted barely 10 seconds, showed that most journalists knew within an hour that the Godhra incident was not an accident but an organized act of violence. They knew that it was veritably a terror attack by an Islamist mob against helpless, unarmed Hindus. Yet, around two and half years after the carnage, when the Congress returned to power in the Centre, cobbling up a post-poll alliance, and when it announced the formation of a commission to declare the carnage an ‘accident’, hardly any journalist protested saying it was a mockery of justice.

What that short conversation also showed was how a journalist, even if he wanted to speak the ugly truth, would have to surrender to the moral compass. Since he won’t be able to control the narrative, he would be left to control his anger and disgust, failing which he will be branded a Sanghi and unprofessional and whose career path would be cut short.

(The book ‘Sanghi Who Never Went To A Shakha’, authored by Rahul Roushan, was published by Rupa Publications and released on 10 March 2021. The link to buy the book is here.)

From fetus killed with sword to Sanjiv Bhatt’s imaginary meeting with CM Modi: Busting 5 myths used to defame Modi and Shah after 2002 Gujarat riots

OpIndia Staff
-
0
From fetus killed with sword to Sanjiv Bhatt’s imaginary meeting with CM Modi: Busting 5 myths used to defame Modi and Shah after 2002 Gujarat riots

On Friday, 24 June 2022, the Supreme Court of India upheld the SIT’s clean chit to the then Gujarat CM Narendra Modi in the 2002 Gujarat riots. The SC was hearing a plea filed by Zakia Jafri, widow of former Congress MP Ehsan Jafri, who was killed during the violence at Gulbarg Society in Ahmedabad on 28 February 2002, challenging the clean chit given by the SIT to PM Modi and 62 others for their alleged role in the violence.

While delivering its verdict, the apex court said that the “appeal is devoid of merits”. A bench headed by Justice A M Khanwilkar refused to order a probe into allegations of a “larger conspiracy” behind the Gujarat riots.

The apex court, with its ruling, has brought the curtains down for a propaganda industry that relied on churning out sensational conspiracy theories to keep the pot boiling about the Godhra train burning incident and the riots that erupted in its wake. With its dismissal of Zakia Jafri’s plea, the court has effectively undermined the efforts of the propagandists who sought to bolster their narrative that the Gujarat riots were a planned conspiracy carried out under the aegis of the highest state political leadership.

While the top court’s verdict gave a clean chit to PM Modi in the 2002 Gujarat riots, it would be foolish to assume that the judgment would deter the propagandists from weaving fictional tales about the tragedy. It is, therefore, germane to bust the myths that were propped up by the

Nevertheless, it is important to recount the myths perpetuated by the propagandists who build a career out of peddling misinformation, hearsay, hyperbole and fake news regarding the Godhra train burning incident and the consequent riots.

Here are some of the popular myths that were bandied around after the fateful day when 59 Hindus, including women and children, were incinerated in a train bogey in Godhra, which touched off an ugly spate of riots across the state.

Myth 1: Pregnant Kausar Bano was raped and her fetus was pulled out of her womb and flung into the fire

In the aftermath of the Godhra train burning incident that triggered widespread violence across Gujarat, many media outlets at that time ran a story that a pregnant Muslim woman was raped by a Hindu mob, her pregnant belly slit open and her foetus flung into the fire. Some versions also included that the above act was done with a sword.

Most reports cited Saira Bano, Kausar Bano’s sister-in-law who claimed “What they did to my sister-in-law’s sister Kausar Bano was horrific and heinous. She was nine months pregnant. They cut open her belly, took out her foetus with a sword and threw it into a blazing fire. Then they burnt her as well.” Some versions of the story narrated horrific versions of the fate of the foetus. In other versions, the foetus was slaughtered with the sword, while in some, the foetus was swung on the point of the sword and then thrown into a fire.

However, the postmortem of Kausar Bano told a different story.

A 2010 report states that the doctor who conducted a post-mortem on Kauser found the foetus intact. Dr J S Kanoria, who had conducted the autopsy on 2nd March 2002 presented supporting documents to the special court and said that the foetus was intact in the woman’s womb. The foetus weighed 2,500 gms and was 45 cms long.

Further, during the postmortem and cross-examination of the witness, it had come to light that Kausar Bano died of suffocation, fear and shock and her body bore no external or internal injuries. As per reports, during his deposition, Kanoria stated that Bano’s body bore no internal or external injury; moreover, there was no sword injury on her body. Dr Kanoria was working at the government civil hospital during the riots and had given a statement that Kausar Bano’s foetus was removed after the post-mortem. The post-mortem was conducted on 1st March 2002.

Myth no. 2: A stove spill caused the fire inside the Sabarmati express

Another popular myth that was widely shared by propagandists and even media outlets is the “accidental fire” theory that said the Godhra train burning was an incidental fire caused from within the bogey and not by a bloodthirsty mob of Islamists, who harboured deep antagonism for the passengers of the Sabarmati express since they had been to Ayodhya for karseva of the Ram Temple to be built at its original place.

However, the Nanavati-Mehta commission, a commission of inquiry appointed by the government of Gujarat to probe the Godhra train burning incident of 27 February 2002, squarely rejected the claims that fire happened inside the compartment after some inflammable liquid from a stove spilt after some karsevak tried to cook a meal in the compartment. The Commission report said, “The witness has denied that such fire could have taken place in the coach as a result of inflammable liquid in a vessel getting spilt in the coach. This witness has produced photographs taken by his office at the time of examination of that coach.”

Further, Mukesh Joshi, Scientific Officer at FSL, had gone to Godhra thrice in 2002 and he had observed, “n hit marks on the outer side of coach S/6 caused by stones hitting the coach. There were burn marks also on the outer side of coaches S/6 and S/7.”

The Nanavati-Mehta Commission report then talked about the statements of various eyewitnesses. Multiple eyewitnesses narrated how the mob started pelting stones from the left side of the compartment as the train started to move away from the platform. “Sajjanlal Raniwal has stated that as soon as the train had moved out of the platform, a mob standing on the left-hand side had started throwing stones at it and for that reason, he was required to close the door and shutters of the windows of their compartment. If really that had not happened, there was no other reason for Sajjanlal to say so. He would not have closed the windows unless he was compelled by the circumstances to do so.”

“The passengers have also said that as the persons on the left-hand side of the train had started throwing stones at the train, they were required to close the windows of their coach. Some of the witnesses have stated that stones which were thrown on the train had a broken glass of one or two windows and therefore, the passengers in the coach were required to close the tin/metal shutters of the windows on that side. Hariprasad has also clearly stated that right from the time the train had moved out of the station, pelting of stones on the train had started and because of that passengers had closed the windows of their coach. There is no reason to doubt this part of their evidence. Hariprasad and other witnesses would not have said so unless it was true as they had nothing to gain by saying something that which was not correct,” the commission further said.

Myth no.3: Short circuit caused a fire inside the train

Another conspiracy theory about the fire that was floated by Mukul Sinha’s Jan Sangharsh Manch was ‘short circuit’. The Nanavati-Mehta Commission had this to say about the claims: “A short circuit is another probability canvassed by the Jan Sangharsh Manch. No evidence has been led and no material has been produced before the Commission to show the possibility of a short circuit has occurred in the coach. The reason given in support of this possibility is that there was smoke in the coach at first and flames were seen after some time. Not a single passenger of coach S/6 examined by the Commission was asked if anything like short-circuit had happened in the coach.”

Further, the report said, “During the inspection by the Commission in presence of advocates appearing for the parties it was noticed that the electric wires were in the upper parts of the coach. If there was a fire because of a short circuit the passengers who were near that place would have immediately come to know about it. In that case, the passengers who were sitting on the lower seats would not have climbed up on the upper berths to protect themselves. On the contrary, those who were sitting on the upper berths would have immediately come down for saving themselves from fire and electric shock. The passengers would have left the coach immediately through all the four doors and so many persons would not have lost their lives.”

While motivated individuals tried to paint the Godhra train burning incident as an accidental fire from within the bogey, the Justice Nanavati-Mehta Committee report [pdf] talked about what actually conspired in Godhra that led to the deaths of 59 Hindus. Right after the Godhra platform and boundary, there is a road and a locality named ‘Signal Falia’. “It extends up to the culvert and goes further towards A cabin. It is a locality mainly inhabited by Ghanchi Muslims,” the report mentions. When the train arrived, a lot of unauthorised vendors, mainly Ghanchi Muslims, would come on the platform and sell snacks, cold drinks, bidis, etc.

The report further states that the train arrived at the platform at 7:43 AM as it was running about 5 hours late and there was a halt of about 5 minutes. In its evidence portion, the report cites media reports from 28th February 2002, the day after the carnage, where leading mainstream media had reported that a mob has set Hindus on fire. They mentioned how Hindus were returning from karseva and how the mob set the train coaches on fire with petrol.

The Times of India had mentioned how the train was stopped at Signal Falia where someone had pulled the chain and after initial pelting of stones on coach S6 and S7, windows were broken and petrol bombs were thrown inside. The Indian Express, too, carried eyewitness statements on how the mob had set the coach ablaze after pelting stones.

Myth no. 4: Karsevaks attempted to abduct a Muslim girl that goaded the mob into burning the train

Yet another fictional tale talks about a “scuffle” following which ‘karsevaks’ tried to abduct a Muslim girl, raising the hackles of the Muslim mob and eventually leading them into doing what occurred at Godhra. However, the Nanavati-Mehta commission rejected the hypothesis, stating that the claims of karsevaks abducting a Muslim girl were far-fetched and did not belong to the realm of reality.

“From the evidence of all these witnesses and other material on record it becomes clear that except overcrowding in the train and occasional raising of slogans inside the train and on platforms of the intervening stations, the Ramsevaks had not done anything and no incident had happened earlier which could have led to the incident which later on happened at Godhra,” the commission concluded on the rumours of a scuffle that triggered the train burning.

Regarding the ‘attempted’ abduction of a Muslim woman following the “scuffle”, the Commission comes to the conclusion that the version given by the lady did not appear to be true. “If they had really gone to the station for going to Vadodara, they would have boarded the Sabarmati Express train as it would have taken them to Vadodara earlier, but they had not done so. The alleged attempt to abduct her was made while they were near the bookstall. That would mean that they were almost in the middle of the covered portion of the platform and very close to the offices of the railway staff,” the commission observed.

“The evidence discloses that there were many persons on the platform. Apart from passengers, many Muslim vendors were there. The railway staff was present in their offices. Some policemen were also present. If she had raised shouts to save her then they would have been heard at least by some persons who were near about but not a single vendor or anyone else has come forward to support her version,” the commission noted while debunking the testimony of the Muslim woman.

“According to her evidence, they had then gone inside the office of the booking clerk. They did not inform anyone there about what had happened. When inside that office, they had no reason to be afraid of anything thereafter and return immediately to their relative’s place instead of waiting for the Memu train which was about to arrive. Her explanation that she was much frightened and had giddiness and, therefore, they had decided not to go back to Vadodara on that day, does not appear to be true,” the Nanavati Mehta Commission report stated.

Myth no.5: Tainted former IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt met CM Narendra Modi at his residence on 27 February 2002

Another popular myth that is widely shared among liberal circles is that former IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt met with CM Narendra Modi in the latter’s residence on 27 February 2022. This meeting is especially highlighted to implicate PM Modi for being complicit in the carnage that followed in the wake of the Godhra train burning incident.

However, the Nanavati-Mehta commission concluded that the former IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt, who is currently serving life imprisonment in a custodial death case, had lied and made up stories about him attending a meeting at the then Chief Minister Narendra Modi’s residence on February 27, 2002.

Bhatt, who became a big face of the anti-Modi lobby, alleged in 2011 that during the 2002 post-Godhra riots, the then Chief Minister Narendra Modi had called a meeting at his residence on 27 February 2002 to “let Hindus vent out their anger against Muslims so that repeat of Godhra-like incident never happens in the state”.

Bhatt, in an affidavit submitted to the Supreme Court, had claimed that this meeting took place following the Sabarmati Express burning incident in which 59 Ayodhya Kar Sevaks had died.

At the time of the alleged meeting, Bhatt was the deputy commissioner of the state intelligence bureau. He further stated in the affidavit that the meeting was attended by eight top police officers. Bhatt also alleged that the SIT constituted to probe the riots was trying to protect the Gujarat government.

The Nanavati-Mehta commission report has, however, rubbished Bhatt’s allegations saying that he used a false document, a fax message, to support his presence at the meeting. “On consideration of the evidence, it clearly appears that Bhatt is not telling the truth with regards to what happened in the meeting held on February 27, 2002, at the CM’s residence. Claims made by him of being present in the meeting appear to be false,” stated the second part of the report of the ‘Commission of Inquiry’ by Justice G T Nanavati and Justice Akshay Mehta.

The report adds that Bhatt’s claims about chief minister Modi’s statements were a story made up by him and “deserve to be discarded as false.”

The commission stated that the copy of the fax message, which Bhatt had used to claim he was present in the February 27, 2002 meeting with the then Gujarat CM Modi, was, in fact, sent on March 2, 2002, by one PP Upadhyay, about an incident in Pandarva, Panchmahal.

‘You are responsible for the safety of MLAs and their families’, Eknath Shinde camp writes to Uddhav Thackeray calling removal of security a political vendetta

OpIndia Staff
-
0
‘You are responsible for the safety of MLAs and their families’, Eknath Shinde camp writes to Uddhav Thackeray calling removal of security a political vendetta

Rebel Shiv Sena leader Eknath Shinde and other MLAs in his camp have written a letter to Maharashtra’s Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray, Home Minister Dilip Walse Patil, and Maharashtra’s DGP Rajnish Seth asking them to restore the security provided to the rebel Shiv Sena MLAs and their families with immediate effect. Eknath Shinde has said that the security of the dissident Shiv Sena MLAs was removed as political revenge.

Eknath Shinde tweeted, “The protection of Shiv Sena MLAs has been withdrawn on the orders of the chief minister and the home minister due to political vendetta. It is the government’s responsibility to protect them and their families.”

Eknath Shinde wrote in his following tweet, “In the last two and a half years, the Shiv Sena was and is being decimated in a similar manner by the constituent parties in Maha Vika Aghadi.”

In the letter signed by the rebel MLAs, it is said, “We are current sitting MLAs, however, the security provided to us at our residence as well as to our family members as per the protocol has been illegally and unlawfully withdrawn, as an act of revenge. Needless to mention, this sinister move is another attempt to break our resolve and arm-twist us to give in to the demands of the MVA government comprising of NCP and INC goons.”

The letter further said, “We state that the reason to give security is a threat and not which side of the politics we are. However, the threats due to which we were forced to leave the state of Maharashtra have been compounded by these actions on the part of MVA leaders. We further state that not only the security of our families and relatives have been compromised by removing the security personnel but also there is an ongoing agenda wherein various leaders of the MVA government are instigating the cadre of their respective parties to take up violence to further intimidate us which is evident from the media reports published on 23.06.2022 at various print and digital publications.”

The rebel MLAs also quoted Sanjay Raut’s threats in this letter. They said in the letter, “Mr. Sanjay Raut threatened the Petitioners and the other members by stating that he would make it difficult for the MLAs who have left to return to Maharashtra and move around in the State of Maharashtra. The relevant part of the interview given by Mr. Sanjay Raut is extracted herein: Let all the MLAs come to the floor of the House. We will see then. These MLAs who have left… they will find it difficult to return and move around in Maharashtra.” The rebel MLAs also attached the NDTV report’s link in which the quoted statement of Sanjay Raut is included.

The offices of the rebel Shiv Sena MLAs Mangesh Kudalkar and Tanaji Sawant are vandalized by the Shiv Sena goons and the rebel MLAs have held Sanjay Raut responsible for this. The rebel Shiv Sena MLAs in the Eknath Shinde camp wrote in the letter, “The impact of these statements was borne by two of our members as their offices were vandalized by the carders of Shiv Sena merely after hours of withdrawing the security from MLAs. It will not be out of place to mention that recently the same scenario had happened in the State of Punjab also where the security of several high profile persona was removed by the state government due to which most of the high profile people became targets of gangsters/goons in the state and the withdrawal of security from MLAs is likely to create a similar impact in the state of Maharashtra as well.”

Concluding with the request to restore the security as before, the rebel MLAs said that if any harm is caused to their families, the Maha Vikas Aghadi leadership should be held responsible for the same. They said, “We state and demand that the security which we are entitled to under protocol should be provided to our families with immediate effect. We further state that if any harm were to come to our family members, the Chief Minister and the leaders of the MVA Government like Mr. Sharad Pawar, Mr. Sanjay Raut, and Mr. Aditya Thackrey will be responsible for the same.”

Eknath Shinde is an influential leader of Shiv Sena from Thane. He is currently leading a group of more than 40 rebel Shiv Sena MLAs and a few other independent MLAs. All of them are currently staying in the Hotel Radisson Blu in Guwahati.

75 ‘concerned citizens’ including retired IAS and IPS officers, and Ramchandra Guha, send a letter to Karnataka CM to express concern

OpIndia Staff
-
0
75 ‘concerned citizens’ including retired IAS and IPS officers, and Ramchandra Guha, send a letter to Karnataka CM to express concern

A group of 75 ‘concerned citizens’ comprising of some retired IAS and IPS officers along with former cricket expert Ramchandra Guha have written a letter to Karnataka Chief Minister Basavaraj Somappa Bommai sharing their concerns about the recent developments in the state.

The group calling themselves ‘concerned citizens’ said, “We believe the restoration of communal harmony is an important and urgent task and trust that the government you head will not wish to go down in history as the one that precipitated a steep downturn in the reputation and fortunes of our state through inaction.”

The letter further added, “It is even more alarming and distressing that some people in responsible positions, including several who hold office having taken an oath to uphold and abide by the letter and spirit of the Constitution of India, now openly violate that solemn pledge and demonize members of certain minorities.”

Apart from Ramchandra Guha, the signatories include retired civil servants, writers, artists, and academics like Yellappa Reddy, Indian Forest Service (retd), Ravivarma Kumar (former Advocate General, Karnataka), Chiranjiv Singh, IAS (retd), Ajai Kumar Singh IPS (retd), Raghunandan IAS (retd), Shashi Deshpande (writer), and Vaidehi (writer)

The letter comes just weeks after the communal violence seen in Karnataka where Hanuman Jayanti and Ram Navami celebrations were attacked.

Urging active promotion of peace, harmony, and justice for the state’s continued development, the concerned citizens urged the CM to direct the state’s police force to do its Constitutional duty to uphold the law and safeguard vulnerable citizens.

‘This is man-made flood’: Assam CM assures strong action against those who damaged an embankment causing massive flood in Silchar

OpIndia Staff
-
0
‘This is man-made flood’: Assam CM assures strong action against those who damaged an embankment causing massive flood in Silchar

Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma has said that strong action will be taken against those people who broke the bethukandi embankment, which led rising water from Barak River to enter the Silchar town, causing unprecedented flood. While Silchar faces floods almost every year, this year the situation is very bad, with flood waters reaching roofs of some single floor houses in the largest town in Southern Assam.

However, this flood has been described as man made flood by officials and the CM, not natural flood. While on a visit to Silchar on June 23 to review the flood situation, Himanta Biswa Sarma said that people willing breached the vital embankment, and not action but strong action will be taken against the culprits. The CM added that if people break embankments, than there can be no solution of the flood problem.

‘This was not a natural flood, this flood was created. What measure can be taken to prevent a created flood. For natural flood we can think about solutions, but if people decide that they will bring in water, what can be done’, the CM said.

It is notable that last month, some people had cut the vital embankment to let water from a lake to enter the river. While the water level had risen in May, the embankment was not breached. But the rising wated had flown over the embankment and entered the area. Due to this, the water level of the Mahisha Lake had gone up. As the flood situation was still worrying, the irrigation department had not opened the sluice gate, and the water in the late didn’t recede, even though the water in the Barak river started to recede.

Due to this, people living in the area had started to dig a pathway for the water to move from the lake to the river. This did solve the problem, and the water level in the lake came down. But this was a big mistake by people, because when the water in the river started to rise again due to non-stop rain earlier this month, there was no embankment to keep the water away from the town. The strong water current quickly widened the drain that was dug through the dyke, and water started to enter Silchar through it.

While the Water Resource Department had filed an FIR after it was learnt that the embankment was breached by people, allegedly the authorities didn’t taken action in time to repair it. The department later did repair the damage, but by that time it was too late and it could not hold back the water.

Talking about the issue, Assam State Disaster Management Authority CEO GD Tripathi said, “the action by the miscreants turned out to be counterproductive and it resulted in widespread flooding in Silchar. Many parts of the town are still flooded.”

An FIR has been registered with Cachar police in the matter.

Chandigarh: Complaint filed after video of youths desecrating Shivling goes viral, Bajrang Dal demands action after they poured beer on Shivling

OpIndia Staff
-
0
Chandigarh: Complaint filed after video of youths desecrating Shivling goes viral, Bajrang Dal demands action after they poured beer on Shivling

A viral video has emerged where two young people in Chandigarh were seen pouring beer on a Shivling while the song “Bhole Baba” played in the background.

On the banks of a river, one man was observed pouring beer from a tin can while another was seen drinking next to it. Both were seen wearing shoes. The video was reportedly shot by an accomplice of the two. According to reports, Bajrang Dal and Bharatiya Janata Party representatives lodged a complaint with the IT Park police station, demanding stern action against the youngsters.

According to reports, the youth and his accomplices who poured beer on the Shivling have been identified by Chandigarh Police. The water body near where the incident was performed, however, does not appear to be from Chandigarh. According to Rohtash Yadav, SHO of the IT Park police station, the crime in question did not occur under his jurisdiction. However, a complaint about this incident was filed at his police station. The location, including the river flowing in the video, does not appear to be situated in Chandigarh. The video and complaint have also been forwarded to the UT Police cyber cell, which will now examine the matter.

According to the information collected, the accused in the video are Vinod Kumar of Panchkula, Naresh alias Kalia of Manimajra, and Vivek of Bapudham. Two of the accused are seen on the video, and one is filming the act. Shiv Bhakti songs were also played in the background. The person who poured alcohol on the Shivling is Naresh alias Kalia. Hindu groups have reportedly identified him. He is said to be on the run. Hindu organisations also paid visits to his Indira Colony house, where his mother said he has not returned to his home yet.

Boxer and Congress leader Vijender Singh defends secessionist lyrics of Sidhu Moosewala’s song ‘SYL’ released posthumously: What happened

OpIndia Staff
-
0
Boxer and Congress leader Vijender Singh defends secessionist lyrics of Sidhu Moosewala’s song ‘SYL’ released posthumously: What happened

A day after the deceased Khalistani sympathiser and Punjabi singer Sidhu Moosewala’s song SYL’ (Satluj Yamuna Link Canal) was released, many social media users pointed out the problematic lyrics of the song which centres around the long-standing river water dispute between Punjab, Haryana, and Himachal Pradesh. Meanwhile, the celebrated boxer and Congress leader Vijender Singh used Facebook to defend Sidhu Moosewala’s song, which openly exalted Khalistani terrorists and called for the secession of Punjab from India.

Vijender Singh’s Facebook post

In his Facebook post, Congress leader Vijender Singh shared a few lines from the song by Moosewala, who had also joined Congress last year before the Punjab Assembly elections.

In the lyrics shared by Singh, Moosewala had said that after ‘returning’ Haryana and Himachal Pradesh to Punjab, complete sovereignty should be provided to Punjab else they will not give a drop of water to anyone. Although the song’s demand for state sovereignty essentially advocates for a separate Khalistan, Vijender Singh defended the song’s lyrics by asserting that Moosewala has spoken about the country’s unification in his song.

Singh further added that Moosewala used the word ‘sovereignty’, by which he meant uniting Haryana and Punjab whereas the truth is that Moosewala’s song discreetly echoes the call of pro-Khalistan groups for the separation of Punjab from India and the establishment of an independent state of Khalistan.

Singh further defended Moosewala by claiming that the deceased singer used the word “sovereignty” to indicate the union of Haryana and Punjab, whereas the truth is that Moosewala, in his song released posthumously, actually advocated the secession of Punjab from India as Khalistan.

As the Twitter user “The Hawk Eye” summarised on Twitter, the lyrics of the song glorified terrorists, provoked violence, and tried to fuel the fire of ‘self-determination’ for Punjab, talking about an independent Khalistan.

The song, in which Moosewala repeatedly says that forget water, we will not give even a drop of water to anyone, has problematic lyrics and visual imagery all the way through. Right at the start, Moosewala talks about giving Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, and Chandigarh to Punjab. On 1st November 1966, post-independence Punjab was divided into 3 states, Punjab, Haryana, and Himachal Pradesh on the basis of language.

The song then goes on to demand complete sovereignty for Punjab while also wishing for the return of Babbar Khalsa terrorist Balwinder Jattana.

In the text on-screen during the song, Sidhu Moosewala goes on to call SYL canal the causative agent of the Congress-led pogrom of Sikhs in Delhi in 1984. 

The Satluj Yamuna Link (SYL) canal

The Satluj Yamuna Link Canal is a proposed 214-kilometre-long canal connecting Sutlej and Yamuna rivers. It was planned in 1966 after the state of Haryana was carved out of Punjab.

While it was resolved to share resources, the conditions for sharing the waters of the Ravi and Beas rivers remained undetermined.

Punjab, however, opposed sharing water from the two rivers with neighbouring Haryana, claiming riparian principles, which indicate that a landowner who owns a piece of property next to a body of water has the right to use the water, besides arguing that it had no water to spare.

Notably, while Vijender Singh’s village in Rohtak, Haryana doesn’t need water from the proposed SYL, plenty of villages in neighbouring districts are totally reliant on rains and are waiting for the completion of Satluj Yamuna Link Canal to get regular water supply for their fields.

How burning of 59 Ram Bhakts led to 2002 riots, malicious campaign by Teesta Setalvad and pain of CM Modi: What Amit Shah said in his interview

OpIndia Staff
-
0
How burning of 59 Ram Bhakts led to 2002 riots, malicious campaign by Teesta Setalvad and pain of CM Modi: What Amit Shah said in his interview

Speaking in an interview about the 2002 Gujarat riots following the Supreme Court’s rejection of a petition opposed to the clean chit given to then-Chief Minister of Gujarat Narendra Modi in the 2002 unrest, Home Minister Amit Shah asserted that he saw Prime Minister Modi’s pain after the violence and that, despite knowing the truth, he continued to cooperate with authorities.

In an interview given to news agency ANI, Amit Shah said, “I have seen Modiji in pain after the riots. A national leader of such a stature kept mum even after such allegations. I have seen that all and we are now happy that the Supreme Court came with this verdict.”

Amit Shah also stated that the court observed the case to be highly politically motivated. When asked why the leaders in the BJP did not do a press conference and an interview then, Amit Shah said that he stayed silent because the matter was subjudice. “We could have done this interview back then but we refrained because justice was yet to be delivered. We wanted the truth to be out in the public domain,” Home minister Shah said.

Nexus of political parties, ideological journalists and NGOs

Amit Shah emphasised that the riots and circumstances were exacerbated by the efforts of a nexus, which included opposition political parties, politically driven media reporters and journalists, and certain non-governmental organisations. Also speaking about the Special Investigation Team, Amit Shah said that it was not something ordered by the court, it was actually consented by the state government when asked by the court.

Amit Shah stated that all the allegations against the government of Gujarat were fake and fabricated. He said that the sting operation by Tehelka was also fake and ideologically motivated. “All the sting operations were fabricated. The court has itself observed that efforts were made to put a bad tag on the state government. It was we who agreed to constitute the SIT. Why there was no SIT after the 1984 riots in Delhi?” Shah remarked fiercely when asked about the BJP’s denial of the SIT.

Amit Shah also named NGO activist Teesta Setalvad and her involvement in the case to defame the authorities and the government. “Even the affidavits of the victims were signed by the NGOs. Things were fabricated this way. Teesta Setalvad’s name is openly known to all. Everyone knows how she has been involved in this.”

Gujarat has adopted the model of development, not violence

Adding more to his response to the allegations made by people, Amit Shah said that Gujarat adopted the model of development and not violence. “What is significant is the Gujarat model of development and not violence. What is more important than the verdict of the court is the public’s mandate. We have continuously won elections in Gujarat and we know that the public trusts us. Gujarat had a 10% agriculture growth rate for several years and people talk about that. The truth of the riots is known to everyone,” Amit Shah said.

Expressing his pain for the incident, Amit Shah said, “I have seen a child of 16 days burnt completely. I have taken bodies and survivors to the hospital. I was there myself present at the ground.”

Amit Shah raised questions about the silence from Congress over the death of 59 “Ram Bhakts” who were burned alive at the Godhra railway station, that initiated the 2002 riots. Further, Amit Shah put to rest an oft-repeated lie that the dead bodies from Godhra were paraded in Gujarat to stir emotions and engineer the riots. 

He said that the main reason for the riot was the burning of the train in Godhara but no one speaks about it. “People alleged that we paraded the bodies to instigate mobs. No, that is not true. The bodies of the deceased were taken to Sola civil hospital and then they were handed over to their families. All such allegations were completely false.”

In his closing remarks, pointing at Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, Shah said that Narendra Modi is not one who does drama and calls ministers and people to pressurize authorities. He said, “Narendra Modi is an honest person and he went all alone and faced all investigations. We believe in truth and we don’t fear anything.”

Amit Shah once again busts the myth of ‘Godhra dead bodies being paraded’ to instigate riots in 2002, here is what he said

OpIndia Staff
-
0
Amit Shah once again busts the myth of ‘Godhra dead bodies being paraded’ to instigate riots in 2002, here is what he said

2002 Gujarat riots are one of the most painful chapters of independent India’s history. Union Home Minister Amit Shah, who comes from the same state of Gujarat, has finally broken his silence over the issue and put to rest several myths circulating about those riots in an interview with Smita Prakash from ANI.

Amit Shah raised questions about the silence from Congress over the death of 59 “Ram Bhakts” who were burned alive at the Godhra railway station, that initiated the 2002 riots. Further, Amit Shah put to rest an oft-repeated lie that the dead bodies from Godhra were paraded in Gujarat to stir emotions and engineer the riots.

Amit Shah clarified that the burnt dead bodies from Godhra were taken to Sola Hospital in closed ambulances, on the outskirts of Ahmedabad, and were not paraded at all in front of anyone. While Amit Shah maintained that the massacre of Ram Bhakts returning from Ayodhya was the main reason for the state-wide riots, he categorically stated that none of the dead bodies was paraded to stir emotions.

The Civil Hospital in Ahmedabad, which would have been an obvious choice to bring home the deceased, was skipped. The Civil Hospital is situated in Asarwa, Ahmedabad which is a communally sensitive area. Years later, in 2008, the civil hospital in Ahmedabad was the target of a terror attack that claimed the lives of 56 people and left over 240 injured

Further, Shah said that a 16-days-old was burnt in her mother’s lap. Shah himself eventually cremated many of those who were burnt alive in Godhra. Amit Shah mentioned how people were angry after coming across this visual of nearly 5 dozen Ram Bhakts burnt alive, however, Amit Shah dismissed the allegations that the dead bodies were paraded around Gujarat to instigate anger.

It is notable that Amit Shah was not the Home Minister at the time of the Gujarat riots and the home ministry was with Gordhan Zadaphia. In the aftermath of the riots, Amit Shah was elevated to the post of the Home Minister of Gujarat.

Following the Supreme Court’s dismissal of Zakia Jafri’s petition against the then Chief Minister Narendra Modi, Amit Shah said, “The entire conspiracy was staged to tarnish the reputation of Narendra Modi but in the end, truth triumphed. It is wrong to use such communal riots for politics but still, allegations were leveled against Narendra Modi. People used to write op-eds against Narendra Modi before every foreign visit. However, now even Supreme Court has agreed that Zakia Jafri was acting at someone else’s behest.”

Apart from the Gujarat riots, Amit Shah addressed several issues during his interview with ANI including GST, surgical strikes, farmers’ protest, and Pakistan. Shah said that his party has fought many battles like GST and surgical strikes and their success on these fronts is a success for every party member, not just Narendra Modi.

With SC calling out Zakia Jafri, a look back at criminal Sanjiv Bhatt and how he was turned into a hero for lying about 2002 Gujarat

GujaratRiots.com
-
0
With SC calling out Zakia Jafri, a look back at criminal Sanjiv Bhatt and how he was turned into a hero for lying about 2002 Gujarat

Amidst the ongoing ‘The Kashmir Files’ movie issue, several far-left social media trolls and the Congress party supporters claimed in March 2022 that the disgraced cop Sanjiv Bhatt, who is in jail, also is a Kashmiri Pandit. Firstly this is absolutely wrong on facts, he is not. And secondly, even if he was, that makes no difference to the fact that he is and has been found guilty of criminal offences by the court, and his claims debunked by the SIT, which is now proven yet again by the recent judgement dismissing the Zakia Jafri petition by Supreme Court.

It is pertinent to note that the Supreme Court specifically said that Zakia Jafri was tutored and her claims do not hold water. In that backdrop, it is important to remember the crimes of Sanjiv Bhatt and how he was turned into a hero for lying about Narendra Modi and the 2002 Gujarat riots, so much so, that his own crimes and his reasons for going after Modi were brushed under the rug by sympathetic media.

After his conviction in one case in June 2019, more lies were spread by the self-proclaimed ‘liberals’, and media outlets like BBC, who tried to imply that the reason for his conviction was the anti-Modi stance taken by him and not this 1990 case. This included Manu Joseph, a former contributor at Outlook weekly, who had initially made the same false charge which was later made by Sanjiv Bhatt, on Narendra Modi giving ‘orders to the police to allow Hindus to riot the next day’ in a crucial meeting on 27 Feb 2002 held at CM’s Bungalow, Gandhinagar in weekly Outlook dated 3 June 2002. Manu Joseph said: “I also believe that he is in jail right now only because he tried to destroy Modi.” [Manu Joseph’s report of Outlook 3 June 2002 was as false as Sanjiv Bhatt’s claims, and he too can be prosecuted for it. To know the full truth of it, and the lies of Joseph in Outlook, click here.]

Let us see some more reasons why Sanjiv Bhatt was prompted to speak against Narendra Modi. The final SIT report says on pp 48-51:

“(Page 48) …a communication was sent to the (Gujarat) Government to make available the details of all complaints/ pending inquiries/ prosecutions/ departmental proceedings etc against Shri Sanjiv Bhatt. A detailed reply has been received from the Govt. of Gujarat which shows that Shri Sanjiv Bhatt has faced a number of departmental inquiries and he was granted three promotions of Junior Administrative Grade, Selection Grade and DIG Grade on one day i.e. 21-09-2007 after dropping of three departmental inquiries pending against him vide orders dated 06-08-2005, 03-09-2005 and 24-07-2006. Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, who is eligible for the IGP grade has not been promoted because of the departmental inquiries and criminal cases pending against him. A chargesheet served upon him on 29-12-2010, for irregularities in police recruitment under his Chairmanship as SP Banaskantha, is still pending.

“While handling a law and order situation during his posting as ASP Jamnagar in the year 1990, Shri Sanjiv Bhatt committed atrocities on peaceful and innocent villagers belonging to a particular community at a place called Jam Jodhpur. In the beatings by police, one person was killed. The victims included a pregnant woman, two assistant engineers of the Irrigation department and one Circle officer of the Revenue Department. Shri Bhatt applied provisions of the draconian law TADA against innocent persons and arrested 140 individuals under this Act. Due to public pressure, the Government [Our comment: At that time, it was Congress ruling Gujarat. Janata Dal (70 MLAs) and BJP (67 MLAs) combine ruled Gujarat from 4 March 1990 to October 1990, but from 25 October 1990 it was again Congress rule when Janata Dal merged with Congress (33 MLAs out of a total 182) till 13 March 1995] got an inquiry conducted by a retired Judicial Officer into the incident and Shri Bhatt was found guilty of: (a) misuse of TADA (b) police atrocities (c) unnecessary (page 49 now) imposition of curfew for 70 hours leading to hardship and harassment to the people.

“The Criminal case of death of a person due to police atrocities in the incident was investigated by State CID (Crime) against Shri Sanjiv Bhatt and others. After completion of the investigation, the IO sought prosecution sanction from the Government u/s 197 Cr. PC, which was declined and therefore, a closure report was filed in the competent court. However, the Court rejected the closure report on 20.12.1995 and took cognizance. The State Government filed a Criminal Revision Application in the Sessions Court, which was rejected.

The case u/s 302,323, 506(1), 114 of IPC has now been committed to Sessions Court, Jamnagar and is presently pending with the Fast Track Court, Khambhalia for framing of charges against Shri Sanjiv Bhatt and others.

Significantly, Gujarat High Court awarded a compensation of Rs. 1,50,000/- to the victim who had died due to police atrocities in the above case.

“Another criminal complaint was filed against Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, while he was posted as SP, Banaskantha District in 1996 by Shri Sumersingh Rajpurohit, an Advocate practising at Pali, Rajasthan and a criminal case was registered against Shri Sanjiv Bhatt & others vide FIR No. 403/96 dtd. 18/11/1996 u/s 120B, 195, 196, 342, 347, 357, 365, 388, 458, 482 IPC and Sec. 58(1) & 58 (2) r/w Sec. 37 of NDPS Act in the court of Spl. Judge, NDPS Act, Jodhpur, Rajasthan. The allegations, in brief, are that the complainant Advocate was occupying a property as a tenant in Pali (Rajasthan), which was owned by a lady, who happened to be a sister of Shri R.R. Jain, a sitting Judge of Gujarat High Court. As per the said criminal [page 50 now] complaint, Shri Sanjiv Bhatt and his subordinate police officers allegedly planted 1 ½ kg of Narcotic drug in one room in a hotel at Palanpur, Gujarat, which was shown as occupied by the said complainant, though he was at Pali (Rajasthan) at that time. The said Advocate was abducted at midnight on the instructions of Shri Sanjiv Bhatt by his subordinate Police officers of Gujarat police, who went from Palanpur, Gujarat to Pali (Rajasthan) to abduct him. The said advocate was brought to Palanpur, Gujarat and pressurized by Shri Sanjiv Bhatt and his subordinate police officers to vacate the said property by showing him arrested under NDPS offence. The said Advocate, while in the custody of Gujarat Police and due to police torture, vacated the property and physical possession of the property was handed over to the sister of Shri R.R. Jain, Judge of Gujarat High Court. Shri Sanjiv Bhatt and his subordinate police officers, thereafter released Shri Sumersingh Rajpurohit on 08-05-1996, by filling a report u/s 169 Cr. PC, in which it was mentioned that Shri Sumersingh could not be identified in the Test Identification Parade. Quashing Petitions were field in this matter by the accused persons in Rajasthan and Gujarat High Court, but the same had been dismissed. The matter is now pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.

“In the meantime, on the complaint of Shri Sidheshwar Puri, Secretary, Bar Association, Pali (Rajasthan), National Human Rights Commission taking a very serious view of this false case under NDPS Act vide its order dated 15-09-2010 asked Govt. of Gujarat to pay a sum of Rs. one lakh as monetary relief to Shri Sumersingh, Advocate, Pali.

“Significantly, Gujarat Vigilance Commission recommended twice on 15-07-2002 and 19-10-2006 that Shri Sanjiv Bhatt should be placed under suspension for his professional misconducts, but the govt. of Gujarat did not do so.

“In view of the aforesaid position, it can be inferred that Shri Sanjiv Bhatt is facing a lot of problems in service matters and has [page 51 now] got an axe to grind against the Govt. of Gujarat and, therefore, his evidence is ill-motivated and cannot be relied upon.”

This shows that as the late Haren Pandya, Sanjiv Bhatt took on Modi for similar reasons. One, his promotion was due but could not be got due to departmental inquiries and criminal cases. And second, and most importantly, he took on Modi so as to become a ‘hero’, get the support of the mainstream media, the then ruling UPA, and then get out of the serious cases pending against him.

He hoped that with the national and international media raising his issue as a ‘cop who took on Modi’, the courts would not convict him, and his prosecution would be seen as ‘vindictive action by Modi Government on a whistle-blower cop’. This same is also the strategy of Teesta Setalvad, any prosecution of her is cried as ‘vindictive action’ and support is organized worldwide immediately for her. However, Sanjiv Bhatt did not succeed in courts, though he did in the media and political circles [political opponents of the BJP]. On 20 June 2019, he got life imprisonment in the 1990 Jamnagar case.

But he has supporters on Twitter, which include many mainstream journalists and political leaders and workers, who continue to demand his release, claiming that he was ‘framed’ for taking on Modi! What wonders his strategy of taking on Modi worked for him! Had he not taken on Modi, and been an unknown officer with criminal cases, who would have demanded his release, or immunity from prosecution?

He deserves to be in jail for far more crimes committed by him as well, primarily perjury. There is a truckload of evidence of Sanjiv Bhatt’s crimes, which has been covered up totally by the media.

Let us see how similar it is to the late Haren Pandya. Haren Pandya was accused of demolishing a dargah near his house on 1st March 2002 in anger against Godhra, a dargah which was on the roads causing inconvenience to traffic and may have had to be demolished by the municipal corporation anyway. The self-styled liberals were howling against Haren Pandya much before March 2002 itself owing to his alleged ‘anti-minority’ views. [In 2001 when the movie Gadar was released, he had said “There is nothing in it which would hurt an Indian Muslim. If there’s anything it’s against Pakistan”.] After the alleged role of Pandya in the dargah demolition, they were condemning Pandya even more.

There was a self-appointed Concerned Citizens’ Tribunal (CCT), headed by Retd Supreme Court judge Justice Krishna Iyer, which had no authority to do anything and gave a horribly biased report full of lies [e.g. it claimed that ’40 were killed in police firing in Ahmedabad on 28 February 2002 out of which 36 were Muslims’, while the fact is that 17 were killed in police firing on that day of which 11 were Hindus, as mentioned by the SIT report on page 210]. That CCT report was largely authored by Teesta Setalvad, many parts of that report are copy-pasted word for word from earlier articles of Teesta Setalvad’s magazine Combat Communalism of earlier months of 2002, and whose contribution in making of the report has been acknowledged by Justice Krishna Iyer himself in Volume 1, pp 5-6.

The CCT published its report in November 2002 in the form of a book titled “Crime against humanity” and made many charges against the late Haren Pandya himself for his alleged anti-Muslim statements and activities and severely criticized Pandya on Vol. I page 36, page 44, page 48, Vol. II page 48, page 49, page 52, page 77, page 87. The SIT report gives many quotes from that report against the late Haren Pandya on his alleged anti-Muslim statements and activities on pages 452-456.

But after Pandya started targeting Narendra Modi, they forgot all their charges on Pandya, and made him a hero! This also exposes the biased section of the media- that it will make a hero out of anyone targeting Narendra Modi, ignoring the merits of the case completely, and will forget all charges on that person targeting the big fish Narendra Modi. For the complete truth of the Haren Pandya issue, read this article.

Modi became Chief Minister of Gujarat in October 2001 and had to enter the Assembly. Till then he had never fought a single election in his life from a corporation to the Lok Sabha. Ellis Bridge seat is considered one of the safest for the BJP in the country. It was a part of Advani’s Gandhinagar seat till delimitation. Modi reportedly wanted Pandya to vacate this seat of Ellisbridge so that he i.e. Modi could enter the Assembly but Pandya who was then Home Minister refused. So Modi had to go for Rajkot II which he won by 14,000 votes on 24 February 2002, 3 days before the Godhra carnage.

Pandya was demoted from Home Minister to Revenue Minister and since then his resentment against Modi became even stronger. Pandya then resigned from the Ministry in August 2002 as MoS for Revenue too. Then when in December 2002 elections came Modi denied Pandya a ticket. The SIT also says on page 240 that: “Also relevant here is the strained relationship between him and Shri Narendra Modi, a fact revealed by late Pandya’s father late Vithalbhai Pandya.”

Similar was the case with Sanjiv Bhatt. Not merely was he in trouble with legal cases (the 1990 Jamnagar one, as well as the drug planting one of 1996), he had personal issues with his promotion. On page 518 the SIT said: “The view of the Ld. Amicus Curiae that it does not appear very likely that a serving police officer would make such a serious allegation without some basis appears to be erroneous in as much as Shri Sanjiv Bhatt had been all along a delinquent in his career and had been trying to bargain with the government. The very fact that three departmental enquiries against Shri Sanjiv Bhatt were dropped in 2006-07 and he was given three promotions on a single day would by itself go to show his service career progression. Again, his promotion to the rank of IGP was due for quite some time but he did not get the same because of other departmental enquiries as well as court cases pending against him. The reason by itself is sufficient to bring a motive on part of Sanjiv Bhatt to make a statement against the Chief Minister…”

There is a lot of evidence to expose more of Sanjiv Bhatt’s lies, especially his claims of being present in that crucial 27 February 2002 meeting. A separate article is there to discuss that issue on merit. But here we will just give conclusive evidence that he was not present in that meeting. The SIT report says on page 427:

  • “That Shri Sanjiv Bhatt has been maintaining a close contact with Shri Rahul Sharma, DIG of Gujarat Police and had been getting his mobile phone calls analyzed with a view to ascertain his own movements of 27-02-2002. This shows that Bhatt does not recollect his movements on that day. He has also been trying to ascertain the movements of Late Haren Pandya, the then Minister of State for Revenue on 27-02-2002, with a view to introduce him as a participant of the meeting of 27-02-2002 held at CM’s residence, but could not do so, as Shri Rahul Sharma had informed him after the analysis that there was absolutely no question of Late Haren Pandya being at Gandhinagar on 27-02-2002 night.

“From the study of emails, it appears that certain vested interests including Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, different NGOs and some political leaders were trying to use Hon’ble Supreme Court/SIT as a forum for settling their scores. This would also go to show that Shri Sanjiv Bhatt had been colluding with the persons with vested interests to see that some kind of charge-sheet is filed against Shri Narendra Modi and others.”

This makes things absolutely clear and also shows that many people were involved in this fraud, who knew that Sanjiv Bhatt was not present at the 27 February 2002 meeting, but far from bringing out the truth to the investigators, were helping in this false claim.

Haren Pandya (murdered in March 2003) of course, was not present in that meeting so his testimony does not have the slightest value. The SIT report also says on page 56 that Haren Pandya’s mobile records show that he was in Ahmedabad on 27 Feb 2002 at 22:52 hours, meaning that it was impossible for him to attend the meeting in Gandhinagar at 10:30 PM on 27 Feb. As we showed in Myth 19, he could not even name correctly the people present in the meeting.

This shows that Sanjiv Bhatt was not present at all in the meeting, and he did not even know basic facts about the meeting. It is known since August 2002 (when Haren Pandya’s errors in naming people in the meeting were admitted by him to Outlook and by the magazine itself, or at least after his murder in March 2003 after which Outlook reported that the minister giving the information was indeed Haren Pandya) that Haren Pandya was by no means present in the meeting. But Sanjiv Bhatt did not even know this and hence first asked Rahul Sharma to find out if Haren Pandya could be introduced as a witness-a participant in that meeting.

Most importantly, this conclusively shows that Sanjiv Bhatt was not present at all. If Sanjiv Bhatt was present in the meeting, wouldn’t he know if Haren Pandya was present or not? Why would he need to ask Rahul Sharma to find the call details? This also shows that Rahul Sharma also knew the truth, that Sanjiv Bhatt was not present, but did not tell the investigators.

Besides, Sanjiv Bhatt falsely claimed to be present in the 28 February 10:30 AM meeting at the CM’s Bungalow, Gandhinagar. The SIT says on page 45: “The claim of Sanjiv Bhat that he attended the said meeting at 1030 hours at CM’s location is proved to be false from the location of his mobile phone, which was at Prerna Tower, Vastrapur-I, Ahmedabad City at 10:57:43 hrs.” Sanjiv Bhatt was at Ahmedabad, more than 25 km away from Chief Minister’s Bungalow in Gandhinagar at that time. This conclusive evidence exposing his lies was conveniently ignored by the Leftist media.

(The writer is the author of book “Gujarat Riots: The True Story” which gives all details about the 2002 riots- Godhra and after, one of the admins of www.gujaratriots.com and one of the admins of the Twitter handle @gujaratriotscom)

1...3,1213,1223,123...7,635Page 3,122 of 7,635