On September 28, 2022, the Gujarat High Court granted retired DGP RB Sreekumar temporary release till November 15, 2022. The court also gave him permission to seek a regular release in connection with accusations of “fabricating evidence related to the riots of 2002” and make an application before the sessions court. The Gujarat High Court further said that it will hear Sreekumar’s case together with Setalvad’s on November 15 while granting interim bail to Sreekumar. Sreekumar is likely to be released on Thursday. Setalvad has also been extended interim protection by the Gujarat HC until November 15 when the matter will be heard.

On September 20, the state had submitted its chargesheet in this controversial case that saw the dramatic arrests of Sreekumar and Setalvad on June 25 Although Sreekumar had requested bail before the high court prior to the chargesheet’s filing, the court advised Sreekumar’s advocate Yogesh Ravani to receive instructions if Sreekumar preferred to request bail before the sessions court due to the altered circumstances that have arisen since the chargesheet’s filing. According to their instructions, the took the option of getting interim protection from the High Court and will be approaching the Sessions Court with a fresh bail application.

Meanwhile, Teesta Setalvad, a Mumbai-based human rights activist, had her bail plea postponed by Justice Ilesh Vora’s court till November 15. The Supreme Court awarded her interim protection on September 2. The court further instructed the court to provide Setalvad’s counsel access to the chargesheet upon making the proper request. The senior advocates representing Setalvad, Mihir Thakore, Mihir Desai, and advocate S M Vatsa, stated in court that they had not yet gotten a copy of the chargesheet.

According to a FIR filed by the Ahmedabad Detection of Crime Branch (DCB) section, the retired DGP, Teesta Setalvad and former IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt were detained on June 25 on suspicion of “plotting to falsely accuse innocent people in relation to the riots that occurred in Gujarat in 2002”. The FIR quoted the Supreme Court order from a day earlier, upholding the clean chit by the SIT to then CM Modi in the 2002 riots, saying it “clearly establishes that Sanjiv Bhatt, R B Sreekumar, Teesta Setalvad and others had conspired to abuse the process of law by fabricating false evidence to make several persons to be convicted for an offence that is punishable with capital punishment”.

On July 30, an Ahmedabad sessions court denied bail to Sreekumar and activist Teesta Setalvad. The Ahmedabad Sessions Court, while denying their request for bail, stated that to do otherwise “would implicitly encourage the wrongdoers that in-spite of doing such type of accusations against the then C.M. (Narendra Modi) and others, the Court has lightly enlarged the accused on bail.”

While Setalvad later petitioned the Gujarat High Court and then the Supreme Court for relief, the latter of which granted her temporary release on bail on September 2, Sreekumar remained imprisoned.

The family of co-accused R B Sreekumar had expressed “hope” after the Supreme Court had granted activist Teesta Setalvad interim release following accusations that she had fabricated evidence in connection with the 2002 Gujarat riots. Teesta Setalvad was accused of falsifying evidence. “The ruling offers us a lot of optimism,” said Deepa Srijith, the daughter of the former Gujarat DGP.

The Gujarat High Court had decided to schedule Setalvad’s bail hearing for September 19, nearly six weeks after it had given notice. While granting Teesta bail, the Supreme Court questioned whether this was “standard practice in Gujarat” and inquired of the state government, “What kind of material have you gathered in the last two months” against her. The Supreme Court said further that co-accused in the case shall not take advantage of the relief granted to her. “It is further made clear that the relief of interim bail is granted to the appellant in the peculiar facts, including the fact that she happens to be a lady. This shall not be taken to be a reflection and shall not be used by other accused, as and when such occasions arise. The submissions of the accused shall be considered purely on their own merits.”

Related:

Free Teesta Setalvad: Peers and fellow activists offer a testament to her tenacity

Human Rights defenders stand with Teesta Setalvad

Essential ingredients of investigation, including custodial interrogation, have been completed: SC on granting Teesta Setalvad interim bail

Teesta Setalvad granted interim bail by Supreme Court

Teesta Setalvad bail: SC reminds State of petitioner being behind bars

The post Gujarat Riots Case: Gujarat ex-DGP R B Sreekumar granted interim bail by Gujarat HC appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Twenty years ago, at the end of February 2002, we were in Palo Alto with our daughter, towards the end of a successful lecture tour organised by friends – to build a coalition of groups and voices prepared to stand up against the proliferation of nuclear weapons.

It was with horror and disbelief that we watched on the news, the unfolding of the tragic events starting February 27, into the first week of March… from Godhra to Ahmedabad and across the state.

• The burnt train at Godhra – the incendiary speeches and broadcasts

• The fires, the killings, the mayhem 

• The deliberate targeting of all those belonging to one community

• The brutality of rapes and murders of Muslim women

• A state and a people gone mad with blood lust

• The inaction of the State Police

• The deliberate delay in calling in the Army Units who had been flown in but remained in their barracks for the crucial 48 to 72 hours before being ordered to “restore peace, law and order”.

Were these indeed images of our land and our people? That too in Gandhiji’s Gujarat?

Being many thousand miles away was the toughest of all – what to believe – what to dismiss as exaggerated reports? This was before the WhatsApp pandemic had hit us.

Then slowly as calls and eye witness accounts started trickling in – the dreadful reality slowly began to hit home, and we could no longer escape from the numbing truth that this was indeed true – for the most part, it was deliberately organised violence leading to communal carnage. The world began calling it a Pogrom, and worse – Genocide.

I did the only thing I could do at that time, which was to write an anguished letter to my Prime Minister – Shri Atal Behari Vajpayee – one of the hardest things to do.  I am sharing extracts herewith:

Needless to add, there was no acknowledgement let alone a response. This has, sadly been the fate, for the most part, of many of the letters and statements addressed to either the Honourable President and Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces, or indeed to the Prime Minister. But of that, another time.

To return to the tragedy of Gujarat… The letter from America was dated March 11, 2002. We returned home to India by end of March – but were part of the ongoing, intense debates and discussions that accompanied the public outrage and shock following the events in Gujarat.

Inter Faith Fact Finding and Peace Mission – April 2002

In early April of 2002, a number of us, representing many sectors and faiths, decided to make a visit to Gujarat. Many of us had known each other and worked on peace and conflict issues earlier. We had been in continuous touch with each other ever since the terrible events of Feb 28 – March 2 when the Indian Army was finally provided the necessary facilities and invited to provide ‘aid to civil power’.

Although the worst of the carnage was over by the time we visited Gujarat a month later – it was clear that the people, especially the minorities, were both insecure and faced continuing harassment and abuse.

Our purpose was simple and clear – to gather facts from a variety of sources and to try to restore a sense of confidence among the people. Hence the composition of people from all faiths. These included the late Nirmala Deshpande who led the delegation; the Late Swami Agnivesh; John Dayal, Navaid Hamied; Admiral Ramdas – to name a few…

Knowing that a special Army Unit had been deployed to Gujarat, I decided to call on the General in charge and apprise him of our mission and our presence in the city. It was a pleasure to meet Lt Gen Zameeruddin Shah, and receive a briefing. I remember very clearly that this was an era before the mobile phone had become popular – and my wife had thrust our newly acquired phone into my pocket just before I left for Gujarat. I mention this in light of subsequent events.

Nirmala Didi’s colleague and friend had generously offered to accommodate the group in ‘Eswar Bhavan’ where he lived. No sooner had we moved in, we were virtually ‘gheraoed’ – by elements who clearly knew who we were. 

One could guess their political affiliation, when we were told to “send out the Muslim members of the group” or else face arson and attacks on the entire group. How much more brazen could they get?

After a quick consultation we decided to move to the well-known Sabarmati Ashram, so as not to embarrass or endanger our well-meaning host.

But the unrelenting mobs followed us to the Ashram – with loud demands that we could only stay ‘if the Muslim members of the group were sent out’! At this point I realized that things may get worse, and the Sabarmati Ashram may itself be threatened. 

I therefore decided to call the General, popularly known as “Zoom” Shah, and explained our predicament. He said don’t move sir, we shall do something very soon. Sure enough, in about ten minutes two jeeps with mounted Machine guns appeared from either side of the road, no sooner were they sighted, the members of the “Goonda Mob” scurried away. Just shows the effect of the mere presence of the ARMY. And yet it is a point to ponder seriously and ask the question why it took three days before the Army was deployed on the streets of Ahmedabad and elsewhere?

In 2018, on the occasion of the release of Gen Shah’s book called ‘Sarkari Mussalman’, I remember being distressed to read that some senior officers of the Army had expressed concerns about “Zoom” aka an officer named ‘Zameeruddin’ being tasked with leading troops for this sensitive mission. It was good to hear that Gen Padmanabhan, then Chief of Army Staff, did exactly what I had myself done in 1971 – disregarded the voices of dissent and suspicion, and told ‘Zoom’ to proceed on this mission. As Captain of the INS BEAS in the 1971 operations, I was cautioned likewise about my steward Ali. Needless to say, I rejected the idea outright and sailed through the 1971 war against Pakistan with Ali by my side. 

I am proud of officers like Gen Padmanabhan and Lt Gen Zameeruddin Shah who bring credit to our fine syncretic service traditions. But these were also early signals of how communal prejudice was already present and active in the majority community, including our Armed Forces. Alas we did not take these warnings seriously enough.

Why talk about Gujarat today? What lessons have we learned?

Having managed to locate this letter after two decades – I have been in a further dilemma – as to whether or not to bring this up again at this time, twenty years after the tragedy of Godhra and Gujarat. My wife Lalita and I have agonised over this for some time. We both concluded almost simultaneously, that silence was not an option.  We are senior citizens – who have lived through partition and its horrors. My wife has seen at first hand the brutality of the 1984 Pogrom and worked for nearly two years with the survivors of the Sikh community. We are witness to similar incidents of growing intolerance and communal violence across the country. That these are happening, with impunity, in the land of Buddha, Mahavira, and Mahatma Gandhi is disturbing to say the least. 

Therefore, our decision is, that as a former head of one of our Armed Forces, I should continue to try to speak Truth to Power – which is the one lesson my training in the Navy has taught me.

I have always believed that the Armed Forces represented the uncompromising commitment to the Constitution and its values. We have been clear that there is no way our Services can allow the influence of intolerance, religious bigotry and divisive communalism to infect our secular fighting forces. And yet we have almost helplessly watched the toxin of xenophobic politics relentlessly being injected into the life blood of our democracy.

Despite our Constitutional vision and Dharma so to speak – this is being eroded and weakened – and it is troubling to large numbers of us – possibly the silent majority. We draw attention to these personal and anecdotal events – because it is from the strength of one’s personal experiences that one builds convictions and value-based principles which are essential in our varied and complex societies.

There are a few other troubling issues which must be highlighted in the lessons learned

• The role of Media which is no longer able to call a ‘spade a spade’ – someone rightly described Gujarat-02 an “archetypal post truth event”
• Lack of accountability and liability – many fact-finding missions and investigations later – the only ‘fact’ being quoted is that the then Chief Minister was cleared and given a “clean chit”
• Time and time again, leaders of many political parties, who pour hate and invective and instigate violence, have literally managed to get away with murder! In a recent article, Cherian George, an academic, refers to this as “predatory populism” – which turns into a story of self-defence instead of pre-meditated mass murder. This often leads to “decent citizens baying for blood”.
• Again, to quote Mr Cherian George – we are facing a situation of ‘Think Global and Kill Local’ – the assaults on Human Rights and on Democracy are virtually ignored or condoned by the international community because of the imperative of geo-political and economic interests over so-called concerns about Human Rights.

So, as we approach the twentieth anniversary of the Tragedy of Gujarat – this is a call to the Conscience of all those who still believe in Humanity and Insaaniyat and who will continue to speak up and speak out on behalf of all the injustice, the deaths and violence wrought on thousands of innocents.  Let us not forget that few have been arraigned or brought to book – whereas 32 accused of bomb blasts, again in Gujarat, have been recently awarded the death penalty.

Our struggles to uphold our Constitution must continue with renewed fervour. We reaffirm our belief in Justice, Equality, Freedom, Fraternity and Secularism, as the guiding principles of our Republic. Then alone can we proudly sing:

“Saare Jahaan se Achha Hindustan Hamara” – Jai Hind – Jai Jagat!

*While Admiral L Ramdas is the Former Chief of Naval Staff, Lalita Ramdas is a peace activist and one of the most inspiring and vocal members of Indian civil society.

Related:

‘Sleeping with the Enemy?’
The world is watching us: former Admiral L Ramdas to PM Modi and Pres. Kovind

The post 20 years after Godhra – Some reflections appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Image Courtesy: outlookindia.com

Within this wider narrative the slaying in cold blood of HarenPandya, a former minister of the state, on March 26, 2003, a year after the breakout of violence, adds a twist to the sinister tale.

HarenPandya’s journey: A quest for redemption?
The life and death of HarenPandya make for a rather curious tale. Born into a family committed to the RashtriyaSwayamsevakSangh (RSS), he represented as does his father VithalbhaiPandya a worldview that was and is committed to the political transition of Hinduism (a privately held belief) into Hindutva (a political, possibly exclusionary worldview).

A dynamic man who had won three successive elections from the Ellis Bridge constituency in Ahmedabad, Pandya was home minister in Keshubhai’s cabinet and also revenue minister of Gujarat when the carnage was unleashed in 2002. Paldi that falls within his constituency saw extensive damage to property belonging to the Muslim minority and there were some eye witness testimonials that claim to have seen Pandya in the mob.

With this background he contacted me. I was convenor of the Concerned Citizens Tribunal –Crimes Against Humanity Gujarat 2002 and Pandya deposed before us on Ahmedabad in May 2002, at the end of the Tribunal’s sittings all over the state. Justice PB Sawant a former judge of the Supreme Court of India, Justice Hosbet Suresh, retired from the Bombay High Court and KG Kannabiran, doyen of the human rights movement in the country apart from myself were present at the time.

For 17 days since May 1, 2002, the Tribunal had scoured the ravaged districts of the state and met thousands of affected families and recorded the testimonials of the gruesome violence. Police officials, commissioners and collectors of districts had testified before the tribunal. The picture that had emerged before us was chilling. A detailed outline of a conspiracy, already hinted at in sharp bursts of media coverage, revealed a picture of a plan hatched at the very highest level to actively render the police force and other agencies of law protection and enforcement neutralised and impotent. 

Yeh andar ki baat hai, Police hamaare saath hai

Brave and erudite reporting by the media especially the Times of India  and Indian Express as also Communalism Combat’s investigative Genocide 2002 issue (March April 2002) had documented secret meetings and illegal directives to help draw this vivid picture.

Yeh andar ki baat hai, Police hamaare saath hai, (it is an open secret that the police is with us) was the victorious slogan of karsevaks heading to Ayodhya from Gujarat before and after February 15, 2002. CC had for five years before 2002 detailed extensively distributed hate literature by non-state groups and actors supported by the state as also figures and documents that revealed a deep level of infiltration of rabid cadres of organisations involved in the violence into both the police, administration and other wings of governance.

For the tribunal to build on this foundation, and, in conclusion of its analysis of the violence unleashed in 2002, to definitively state that this complicity of the state executive flowed out of the direct action of holding an illegal meeting at which the chief minister specifically issued unlawful directions, a direct testimonial from someone in officialdom to confirm that such a meeting did actually take place on the night of February 27, 2002, was mandatory. As convenor it made my task more herculean to convince someone from officialdom to speak up. Dozens of efforts were made, only some proved successful. Finally the confirmation came from none less than a sitting minister in the Modi cabinet. This testimonial elevated the CCT’s three volume report from a substantive and courageous Inquiry Document into a truly historic document.

What HarenPandya told the CCT
Haren Pandya, when he responded to my efforts and met us, provided that valuable testimonial. We met him in Ahmedabad, a rendezvous cloaked in secrecy, and recorded what he had to say. I put questions to him as framed by the panel. Why had he not prevented the violence in the Paldi area of Ellis Bridge his own electoral constituency, we asked reminding him that he had been seen by some to be in the mob. The mob was enraged he replied, I diverted them away from taking lives to merely destroying property. The frenzy of the crowd had to be felt to be understood, this was not the normal vengeful reaction to a communally surcharged situation. The police were wilfully inactive, he asserted, because there were instructions from the very top. He could testify to a meeting that had taken place where, he confirmed some ministers of the Gujarat cabinet, the director general of police K Chakravarty, commissioner of Ahmedabad, PC Pande and few other critical officers from the secretariat and CMO were also present.

At this meeting the chief minister had allegedly issued clear-cut instructions to the police. There would be palpable Hindu anger visible on the streets the day after the Godhra incident on February 27, 2002. The police should allow this anger to vent itself. In short, do nothing to control it. Pandya provided the official confirmation to the tribunal that the blatantly subversive and unconstitutional acts by the state of Gujarat were born not simply of non-functioning or paralysis when spontaneous communal violence rages on the streets but were calculated and perpetrated actions, at various levels, to allow mass rape and killings.

My later investigations especially after the Supreme Court ordered an inquiry into the complaint filed by Zakia Ahsan Jafri dated June 8, 2006 revealed the names of those bureaucrats and policemen who attended that fateful meeting.

Why did Pandya do it?
His response to the tribunal was that he found the violence sickening and cynically induced and could never be party to such wilful acts of rape, murder and revenge. He also gave us an instance of how he had himself, using his privileged security helped escort the DawoordiBodhra religious chief living in Saraspur, the Chhotamullahas he is known, to the airport to escape safely to Mumbai.

In the violence ravaged areas, testimony after testimony of affected victims and even criminally errant policemen corroborated the three days long (72 hours) wilful inaction by the police who had been instructed not to act. We have a three day holiday, it is your turn to die, is what PI of Naroda police station KK Mysorewala told women who were stripped and chased naked by a virulent mob before many of them were killed at Naroda within Ahmedabad. Over 120 people met an unspeakably humiliating and violent end that day in this outskirts of a city, not five-eight kilometres away from Gulberg society at Chamanpura, another site of the worst violence.

We also recorded evidence of similar secret meetings held at Godhra and Lunawada to chalk out the attacks on the minorities in villages in the Panchmahal and Dahod districts. After Ahmedabad, Panchmahals that saw the gruesome killings in Kidiad and Pandharwada, apart from the gang rape of BilkeesBano and killings of her family, was the worst affected district in terms of loss of life.

Pandya’s ordeal post testimony before CCT
News of Pandya’s wilful betrayal inevitably reached the ears and eyes of the state government and soon thereafter reached the media around June 2002, a month after his meeting with the tribunal. Political ostracism and venomous exclusion was the price that Pandya had to pay. Modi brooked neither dissent nor healthy competition. Pandya had in his life represented both. Outlook’s story, A Plot from the Devil’s Lair bears this out.

It was no surprise then that Pandya was soon charged with anti-party activities and by July 2002, he was out of the ministry. Modi, riding on a post genocidal electoral high, defied pressures from Advani and Jaitley and did not even re-nominate Pandya for the December 2002 state polls. When Modi rode back to power, Pandya was completely marginalised, reduced to his morning walks and even playing golf. It was just before a morning walk three months later he was shot dead. His body lay where he was killed for nearly hours without anybody reporting it.

Law Gardens, where Pandya was found dead inside a white Maruti car is a fashionably busy part of Ahmedabad but there were no inconvenient witnesses to the incident that day. The thelas selling banjaracostumes andcholis that litter the border of the garden had been evicted from the area just a few days before Pandya’s murder.

Ellis Bridge is the closest police station to Law Gardens but mysteriously it was the Navrangpura police who first arrived at the spot. Officers of the Ellis bridge station had been mis-directed and initially told to go to the Piramal Gardens, not Law Gardens where the incident was supposed to have occurred. Halfway there, someone guided them back to the correct spot.

Was Pandya placed under surveillance?
A remarkable document critical to understanding the Gujarat genocide of 2002, that has not received the attention it deserves is the ‘Personal Register’ maintained by then additional director general of police RB Sreekumar between April 16 and September 19, 2002. This document that runs into 207 pages has received exclusive treatment in my narrative later. But it also has a specific relevance here. All entries in Sreekumar’s register are crucial role in understanding the Machiavellian and evil levels to which both Modi and his mentor, LK Advani, then minister for home affairs and deputy prime minister to boot, went to obfuscate evidence post the genocide and facilitate cover-ups in the registration of offences and their investigations. Some entries specifically point to efforts at the highest levels to stalk Pandya misusing state government machinery after his testimony to the tribunal.

An entry made by Sreekumar in this personal register on June 7, 2002, reveals that the chief minister’s principal secretary, PK Mishra was desperate on behalf of Modi, his boss to ascertain whether or not it was Pandya who had met the Concerned Citizens Tribunal. Mishra asked Sreekumar on that day to find out which minister from the Modi cabinet had met a citizens’ enquiry tribunal (looking into the Godhra and post-Godhra violence) of which retired Supreme Court judge, VR Krishna Iyer, was a panel member. Mishra told Sreekumar that minister of state for revenue, HarenPandya, was suspected to be the man concerned. He also gave Sreekumar the number of a mobile phone (No. 98240 30629) and asked him to trace details of this meeting through Pandya’s telephone records. When Sreekumar did not jump to obey, Mishra repeated the instructions on June 12, 2002, saying that HarenPandya was believed to be the minister concerned who met the tribunal. In his register Sreekumar states that though he had stressed to the chief minister’s principal secretary that the matter was a sensitive one and outside the SIB’s charter of duties, he provided the call details of the above mentioned mobile phone, and handed these over to Mishra through his IGP OP Mathur soon thereafter.

A month before this, while Sreekumar was busy recording all the illegal instructions he was receiving from chief minister Modi another entry made by him on May 7, 2002 is significant. Thirteen days before this date, ADGP Sreekumar had made a detailed assessment on the communal situation in Ahmedabad (April 24, 2002) wherein he had confirmed independent assessments made by rights’ groups and the CCT (especially related to the subversion of investigations by non-registration of FIRs, clubbing of complaints, dropping names of powerful accused etc). This report by the state’s IB chief clearly did not suit Modi since, by sticking to constitutional norms of governance and law enforcement, it veered away from the state’s chosen policy of partisan rule. Little wonder then that this report had bitterly irked the Modi government.

On that afternoon, the chief minister, NarendraModi himself summoned Sreekumar for a meeting unwilling to trust this task to even his trusted coterie. He first asked the ADGP for his assessment of the continuing violence in Ahmedabad. Sreekumar promptly referred to the irksome note on the prevailing communal situation where upon Modi said that he had read the note but believed Sreekumar had drawn the wrong conclusions. The chief minister argued that the violence in Gujarat did not necessitate such am elaborate, professional analysis – it was a natural uncontrollable reaction to the incident in Godhra. That was that. He then asked Sreekumar to concentrate on Muslim militants instead.

Sreekumar pointed out that it was not Muslims who were on the offensive in Gujarat and moreover, he urged the chief minister to reach out and build confidence within the battered and beleaguered minority community. Modi was visibly annoyed at Sreekumar’s suggestions, the register records.

There is another critical entry in the register that I link to the narrative concerning Pandya’s murder. On June 28, 2002, then Gujarat chief secretary SubhaRao had convened a meeting of top officials in the context of the annual rathyatra to begin that year from Jamalpur Ahmedabad on July 7, 2002. Key favoured officers from the coterie of the chief minister were also present. The ADGP Intelligence had suggested a cancellation of yatra given the fragile situation and the newly appointed commissioner of Ahmedabad, KR Kaushik had endorsed the ADGP (Intelligence)’s views. Sreekumar had opined that retributive anger of Muslim youth could fuel tensions. He also shared intelligence inputs received from central agencies about plans of Pan – Islamic militants and Muslim terrorists out to cause harm to both the rathyatra and Hindus. While others present were debating a cancellation of the yatra or negotiating a change of its route, the chief secretary SubhaRao, informed the group that there was no question of cancelling the procession as the chief minister had already taken a firm decision to permit it through its traditional route.

After the formal meeting SubhaRao spoke to Sreekumar personally and suggested that if anyone was observed trying to disturb or disrupt the rathyatrathere was a simple solution that had political sanction and was the well-considered decision of chief minister NarendraModi, that person should be eliminated.Sreekumar had then refused to play ball, stating that such an action would be totally illegal and unethical. Though the chief secretary tried to pressure him into accepting the chief minister’s edict, Sreekumar remained adamant.

Sreekumar’s register abruptly stops on September 19, 2002 after he commits the final folly of honestly reporting on Modi’s inflammatory election rally speech at the temple town of Becharaji in north Gujarat’s Mehsana district (more on that later). But in the months since May 2002, two things are clear. Pandya has won the wrath of Modi by deposing before the Tribunal. Modi and his men in the administration, especially the chief secretary SubhaRao and ACS (home) Ashok Narayan are openly propagating the practice of ‘elemination’ of those who are irked by the policies of the Gujarat government and who may indulge in any activities against rabid Hindu groups or processions.  
 

* This is an excerpt from a yet to be published book by CJP secretary TeestaSetalvad, who was a part of a Concerned Citizens Tribunal that conducted a series of hearings of witnesses and survivors in the aftermath of the Gujarat 2002 genocide. It is being published in wake of the Supreme Court upholding the conviction of 12 people in the murder of HarenPandya, a former Gujarat minister who testified against his powerful bosses and exposed their complicity in fanning the communal flames that ravaged Gujarat.The article is in two parts, this is Part One.

Related Articles:
1. Concerned Citizens Tribunal – An Inquiry into the Carnage in Gujarat
3. A Plot from the Devil’s Lair

The post A Murder Most Foul: How Haren Pandya was silenced appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Photo Credit: Hanif Sindhi, Mail Today 

The total number of people convicted in the case now stands at 15 including Babu Bajrangi whose conviction was upheld. Earlier 12 people had been convicted On Friday, the Gujarat HC reversed the acquittals of three others. The court upheld the conviction of Babu Bajrangi. Suresh a.k.a Richard Charra has also been found guilty. Charra had been accused of rape and had earlier offered the ridiculous defence that he could not have raped a Muslim woman as he was married to one! Meanwhile, Kodnani’s personal assistant KS Chabda was also acquitted.
 
What happened in Naroda Patiya
 
On February 28, 2002, a mob of nearly 5000 people stabbed, burnt alive, looted, raped and sexually assaulted the residents of Naroda Patiya, a mostly Muslim neighbourhood in the suburbs of Ahmedabad. The mob comprised members of Bajrang Dal and the carnage lasted over 10 hours during a ‘bandh’ call given by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad in wake of the Godhra Train Burning incident. Official death toll in the Naroda Patiya case stands at 97.
 
A Special Investigation Team had said that a day after the Godhra incident, Maya Kodnani incited mobs and was seen at the spot by 11 witnesses. Witnesses had told the court that she handed out swords to rioters, exhorted them to attack Muslims and at one point fired a pistol. Even phone records placed Kodnani in Naroda at the time of the incident.
 
How the case progressed
 
A Special Investigation Team (SIT) was formed to investigate various Gujarat riots cases. Special judge Jyotsna Yagnik had convicted 31 others along with Maya Kodnani on August 29, 2012. 29 people were acquitted for lack of evidence. Babu Bajrangi was first awarded life sentence, but this was later commuted to 21 years in prison. Maya Kodnani was granted bail due to ill health in 2014. The convicts appealed the case in the Gujarat High Court where hearing concluded in August 2017.
 
You can read more about the August 2012 Naroda Patiya judgment here.
 
The Gujarat HC judgment
 
The Gujarat High Court acquitted Kodnani stating they found no evidence of a criminal conspiracy in the riots. The HC noted that none of the 11 witnesses had named Kodnani when the case was being registered. “Eleven witnesses gave different statements on Maya Kodnani’s presence at the location, there were contradictions,” said special public prosecutor Prashant Desai. 
 
Advocate Suhel Tirmizi says, “This acquittal is worth challenging and we have sufficient material against Maya Kodnani. We hope and wish victims’ families and survivors would approach the Supreme Court with CJP and appeal against this judgment.” Tirmizi also said that the SC rejected not only a demand for compensation for the victims but also the demand for further investigation in the case.
 

The post Naroda Patiya Case: Guj HC lets Maya Kodnani walk free, Babu Bajrangi stays behind bars appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Judgement in the Zakia Jafri Case –a criminal revision application filed  by the survivor, Zakia Jafri,  has been deferred. On Monday Morning, Justice Gokhani sat at 11 a.m. and asked the SIT counsel, Ratan Kodekar to be present as she wished certain c;arifications. Thereafter, after sitting again, first at 1 p.m. and then again at 2.30 p.m., counsel Mihir Desai (for Zakia Jafri) and SIT counsel, Vaidyanathan have been asked to remain present next week –at a mutually convenient date –to address the court on clarifications. Presently the date fixed is August 28 but this may be slightly altered. Judgement will be pronounced after that.

Earlier in the day,  the judgement had been fixed for Orders on August 21, 2017.

Related Articles:

1. JUDGEMENT DAY, Tracing Chain of Command Responsibility for 2002: Zakia Jafri Case

The post Judgement in Zakia Jafri Case Deferred appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The past week even before the dastardly terror attack has been rife on social media, especially after the communal violence in Bashirat in Bengal, bhakts, have evoked threats and fantasies about the genocidal carnage of 2002. What is it about Gujarat 2002 that it inspires Fantsies (Sic) among Modi Bhakts?

“Hope you all remember what happened in 2002”.  It was a touching news report about a Muslim doctor and his Hindu compounder spreading message of peace in violence-hit Basirhat has angered a BJP youth leader to go on a communal rant and threaten violence. There is nothing offensive in the news posted by Hindustan Times on its Facebook page that, for some reason, got Srinivas Raghavan's goat. Raghavan is no ordinary Indian, he is General Secretary of a BJP Yuva Morcha.

Reacting to HT report on a doctor’s appeal for communal harmony, Raghavan said, “I remember what Mahatma Gandhi did. Enough is enough. We will not tolerate this anymore. Hope you all remember what happened in 2002.” When confronted by other users, he continued his rant, talking of “warning you guys”, “go back to your mother country”, “we are waiting to take revenge” (of 17th century rulers), “the day is not too far”, and so on.

On his Facebook profile section, Raghavan describes himself as a “charismatic go-getter” and a “believer in making India great again”. His page is full of pictures with senior BJP leaders.
On the one hand, we have Modi and his defence league tell the authorities (even the courts) that he did his job, and that 2002 was all about good governance. What then is it about 2002 that inspires excitement (sic) and threat-laden fantasies (sic) among the Modi Bhakts?

Tathagata Roy, the present Governor of Tripura and the former president of the West Bengal state unit of BJP from 2002 till 2006 had stated on Twitter about ‘appreciating what the Hindus did in 2002’.

Another hate spewing Hindutva handle, HDL India, called to turn UP into Gujarat to save it from turning into Kashmir. The @HDLIndiaOrg account is now suspended
 

In 2015, Amitesh Singh, who was followed by Prime Minister Modi on Twitter went a step further and actually gave call for a massacre. Singh was arrested over his tweet and has since disabled his account. In his twitter profile, Singh claimed to be vice-president of the Bharatiya Janata Party’s Yuva Morcha but the party denied any association with him. According to news reports, Singh was the grandson of a BJP MP from Madhya Pradesh.

Is that all in social media, making appreciative noises about 2002? Here are some others who gloat and celebrate the breakdown of Constitutional machinery, weak at best, wilful at best, about the loss of 1926 Muslim lives in 2002 post Godhra train burning in which 59 lives were lost. Read on:
 
 

The post What is it about Gujarat 2002 that Inspires Fantasies(Sic) Among Modi Bhakts? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Eleven persons were sentenced to life by a trial court in 2008, for the gangrape of Bilkis Bano and for the murder of her family members in the wake of the Gujarat carnage. Five and a half months after the Bombay High Court reserved its order on appeals filed by 11 convicts against life sentence awarded to them by the trial court in the 2002 Bilkis Bano gangrape case, a division bench of the Bombay High Court delivered judgement on the appeals today. Justices Vijaya Tahilramani and Mridula Bhatkar began delivering the verdict at 11 am today, Thursday, April 4. On December 2, the high court also reserved order on an appeal filed by the CBI, seeking death penalty for three convicts on the ground that this was the ‘rarest of the rare’ case. The bench of justices Vijaya Tahilramani and Mridula Bhatkar had reserved the order after conducting a day-to-day hearing on both the appeals since July 2016.

These eleven convicts, who were sentenced to life imprisonment by a trial court in 2008 for the gang rape of Bilkis Bano and mass murder of 14 persons including her 3 year old daughter, Saleha had appealed the Special Court Judgement convicting them in 2008.

The Central Bureau of Investigation had sought death penalty for the three men convicted for having gangraped and murdered Bilkis Bano and her family members. The court has, however, set aside the plea for enhancement. Appearing for the CBI, Hiten Venegaonkar had argued that the present case was that of “mass murder” as 14 members of a family, including babies who were a few days old. The riots caused a situation of “exodus” and while the family was on the run, they were raped and murdered. Therefore the case belonged to the “rarest of rare” category and warranted the maximum punishment.
Meanwhile, Harshad Ponda, senior advocate appearing for the convicts, had raised doubts on the chronology of the events narrated by Bilkis, the FIR registered by the Gujarat police and the photographs of the dead bodies and other evidence collected from the spot. The High Court had, meanwhile, rejected an intervention application filed by Bilkis Bano seeking that she be granted hearing.

These convicts who include members of the RSS and VHP and have been convicted for the killing of Bilkees' family members in the aftermath of the Godhra riots, had filed appeals in the high court challenging their conviction. The CBI had also moved the high court, seeking death penalty for three of them. CBI counsel Hiten Venegaonkar sought death penalty for three convicts arguing that it was a case of a “mass murder” and the "rarest of the rare case" as 14 members of a family, including a three-day-old child, were killed. Eleven of the convicts were also concurrently convicted for the gang rape of Bilkees and others under the un-amended section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. Eight policemen and doctors, against whom the special prosecutor, RK Shah had urged special proceedings to begin however were not only acquitted but no special proceedings were ordered by the Special Judge. Harshad Ponda had appeared for the accused.

Special Judge UD Salvi had concluded dictating his judgement on January 21, 2008, in Mumbai when the court had held the 11 convicts-Jaswant Nai, Govind Nai, Shailesh Bhatt, Radhyesham Shah, Bipin Chandra Joshi, Kesarbhai Vohania, Pradeep Mordhiya, Bakabhai Vohania, Rajubhai Soni, Mitesh Bhatt and Ramesh Chandana-guilty of murder and gangrape among other charges.All of them were awarded life imprisonment. It was the case of the prosecution that in March 2002, Bilkis’ family was attacked by a mob at Randhikpur village, 250 km from Ahmedabad in Gujarat. Bilkis, who was 19 years old at the time and five months pregnant, was gangraped by the convicts. Fourteen members of her family were killed. The Supreme Court had ordered the transfer of the case to Mumbai. This was one of two re-trials ordered by the Supreme Court with relation to the genocidal carnage in Gujarat including the famed Best Bakery case. The judgement of the Special Court finally that concluded on April 19, 2008 may be read here.

The chargesheet filed by the CBI in this case that was the document shown by the National Human Rights Commission(NHRC) to the Supreme Court that ordered the transfer of the trial to Maharashtra was a detailed reflection of the complaint dated 4.3.2002 filed by Bilkees Bano at the Limkheda Police station in Panchmahals. Bilkees Bano had been interviewed by Communalism Combat when its co-editor, Teesta Setalvad accompanied former chairperson of the NHRC, Justice JS Verma to the Godhra Relief Camp on March 22, 2002. Her account of the violent ordeal that she suffered ma y be read here.  The shocking lapse in investigation by the Gujarat police was the reason for the transfer of the case to Mumbai. The Chargesheet filed by the CBI may be read here.
 
 

The post Bilkees Bano Case: Rejecting Appeals of 11 Accused Bombay High Court Upholds Convictions appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Bilkis Bano, a Survivor and Face of the Struggle for Justice and Reparation Awaits the Verdict in the Apepals by convicts as she now lives in Vadodara

Over five and a half months after the Bombay High Court reserved its order on appeals filed by 11 convicts against life sentence awarded to them by the trial court in the 2002 Bilkis Bano gangrape case, a division bench of the Bombay High Court will deliver judgement on the appeals today. Justices Vijaya Tahilramani and Mridula Bhatkar will begin delivering the verdict at 11 am today, Thursday, April 4. On December 2, the high court also reserved order on an appeal filed by the CBI, seeking death penalty for three convicts on the ground that this was the ‘rarest of the rare’ case. The bench of justices Vijaya Tahilramani and Mridula Bhatkar had reserved the order after conducting a day-to-day hearing on both the appeals since July 2016.

Eleven convicts, who were sentenced to life imprisonment by a trial court in 2008 for the gang rape of Bilkis Bano and mass murder of 14 persons including her 3 year old daughter, Saleha have appealed the Special Court Judgement convicting them in 2008.

These convicts who include members of the RSS and VHP and have been convicted for the killing of Bilkees' family members in the aftermath of the Godhra riots, had filed appeals in the high court challenging their conviction. The CBI had also moved the high court, seeking death penalty for three of them. CBI counsel Hiten Venegaonkar sought death penalty for three convicts arguing that it was a case of a “mass murder” and the "rarest of the rare case" as 14 members of a family, including a three-day-old child, were killed. Eleven of the convicts were also concurrently convicted for the gang rape of Bilkees and others under the un-amended section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. Eight policemen and doctors, against whom the special prosecutor, RK Shah had urged special proceedings to begin however were not only acquitted but no special proceedings were ordered by the Special Judge. Harshad Ponda had appeared for the accused.
The CBI lawyer had also argued that there was an “exodus” of people due to riots and while Bilkis and her family had been on the run, she was gangraped and her kin were murdered. “Therefore, the case fell in the rarest of rare category, for which maximum punishment should be awarded,” Venegaonkar submitted.

Harshad Ponda, the lawyer defending the convicts, questioned the “chronology of events narrated by Bilkis, the FIR registered by Gujarat Police and the photographs of the bodies and other evidence collected from the spot”. He alleged the evidence had been fabricated by the CBI.

Special Judge UD Salvi had concluded dictating his judgement on January 21, 2008, in Mumbai when the court had held the 11 convicts-Jaswant Nai, Govind Nai, Shailesh Bhatt, Radhyesham Shah, Bipin Chandra Joshi, Kesarbhai Vohania, Pradeep Mordhiya, Bakabhai Vohania, Rajubhai Soni, Mitesh Bhatt and Ramesh Chandana-guilty of murder and gangrape among other charges.All of them were awarded life imprisonment. It was the case of the prosecution that in March 2002, Bilkis’ family was attacked by a mob at Randhikpur village, 250 km from Ahmedabad in Gujarat. Bilkis, who was 19 years old at the time and five months pregnant, was gangraped by the convicts. Fourteen members of her family were killed. The Supreme Court had ordered the transfer of the case to Mumbai. This was one of two re-trials ordered by the Supreme Court with relation to the genocidal carnage in Gujarat including the famed Best Bakery case. The judgement of the Special Court finally that concluded on April 19, 2008 may be read here.

The chargesheet filed by the CBI in this case that was the document shown by the National Human Rights Commission(NHRC) to the Supreme Court that ordered the transfer of the trial to Maharashtra was a detailed reflection of the complaint dated 4.3.2002 filed by Bilkees Bano at the Limkheda Police station in Panchmahals. Bilkees Bano had been interviewed by Communalism Combat when its co-editor, Teesta Setalvad accompanied former chairperson of the NHRC, Justice JS Verma to the Godhra Relief Camp on March 22, 2002. Her account of the violent ordeal that she suffered ,ay be read here.  The shocking lapse in investigation by the Gujarat police was the reason for the transfer of the case to Mumbai. The Chargesheet filed by the CBI may be read here.

The post Judgement in Bilkees Bano Case Today, Bombay HC: Guj 2002 Carnage appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Today we bring to our readers this Factfinding report by a group of citizens.

Fact finding report

Vadavali village is situated in Patan district of North Guajrat. Out of the 4 MLA seats from this district 3 seats belong to BJP and 1 to Congress. Vadavali village comprises of nearly 350 Muslim, 700 Patel, 60 Darbar, 150 Thakore, 150 Dalit, 50 Rawal, 50 Prajapati, 30 Rabari, 40 Devi pujak families. This village is part of the Gujarat Government Samras Gram Panchayat Model. The Samras Model was welcomed by this village and especially by Ibrahimbhai Lal Belim who was shot at in the recent rioting incident. In the 2002 Gujarat genocide this village was not affected, in fact the villagers did not participate in the genocide and had also rescued some injured people during the 2002 riots and hence became a bright example of communal harmony.

The village school in Vadavali was one of the centre’s for the Class 10 board exams and children from neighbouring villages were also taking their exams in this centre. On 25/3/2017 post the exams, a scuffle between a Muslim boy from Takodi village and a Thakore boy from Sunsar village broke out. The Muslim residents of the village Vadavali intervened in the scuffle and asked both the children to go back to their respective homes. A while later 15-20 people from Sunsar village arrived at Vadavli village and started thrashing the Muslim boy from Takodi village, the elders from the village intervened and tried to resolve the issue amicably.
he Panchayat elections of Vadavali village are due, in order to declare the village as part of the Samras Model, a gram sabha was organised where all the leaders of various communities came together at the Shiv Temple, and with unanimous consensus Rashidaben Sultanbhai Kuresh was declared the Sarpanc(Village head). Just as the gramsabha was ongoing, huge mobs of nearly 7-5 thousand people who belonged to the Thakore community from Dharipur, Rampur, Merwada approached Vadavali village. The mob attacked the villagers, nearly 142 house of the Muslim community were damaged, 100 houses were burned down, 42 houses were damaged and looted. Ibrahim Lal Khan Belim was killed during the violence and nearly 15-20 people were injured. 2 FIRs were registered in this incident; one of the FIR was filed against the Muslim community and the other against the Thakore community. 14 persons from the Muslim community and 31 persons from the Thakore community were implicated in the FIRs that were filed. Indian Penal Code sections such as Section 120 B which is a section attributed to criminal conspiracy has been included in the FIR. 13 people have been arrested and FIR against the Muslim community was falsely filed as a strategy to create pressure and fear among the community. The FIR is an integral part to prove the communal violence against the Muslim community of Vadavali village.

Conversations with the Locals:

1. It was decided that Vadavali village will be part of the Samras Model and for 2.5 years there would be a Patel Sarpanch and for 2.5 years there would be a Muslim Sarpanch. Rashidaben Sultanmiyaan was elected immediately after which the incident of violence broke out. Rashidaben’s husband Sultanmiyan was the target in the violence and it was he who was injured. Ibrahimbhai, who welcomed this decision of samras and he also felicitated everyone with garlands was also targeted.
2. The mob seemed to have planned the attack, they arrived with barrels of petrol, private guns and other weapons etc. The mob started damaging and looting the gold and silver ornaments and burning vehicles of the Muslim houses, the young Muslim men who tried to resist were attacked with swords and gun firing and were grievously injured.
3. The scuffle between the students was resolved, but one person there threatened saying “within an hour all of you will be finished” this person is a member of Shiv Sena. One of the teachers name Mr Jhala played a pivotal role in instigating this whole incident, he also directed the rioting mob.
4. 2 SRP Jawans were also part of the rioting mob, these two Jawans were from the Thakore community and they were firing with a private gun, a bullet from this firing hit Rashidaben’s husband on his thighs, he is currently undergoing treatment at a private hospital in Patan.
5. The mobs came from villages close to Vadavali, from a distance of not more than 10 Km. Within an hour a mob of 5-7 thousand people emerged loaded with petrol barrels, guns and other dangerous weapons. People said that the police did not do anything and the mobs went unruly and looted and burnt our houses and vehicles.
6. The Haji Peer’s fair was also on the same day as the incident took place, there were several people from the Muslim community who were going on foot to the Haji Peer Dargah, there could have been even a bigger causality. The mobs were aware that there would not be too many people in the village and hence it would be easy to attack.
7. One of the injured persons said that the police was clearly biased, when the mobs were burning the houses and vehicles, beating up residents the police stood there watching, especially Jamadar Gambhirsingh. Jamadar Gambhirsingh thought that I was dead and said “this one is dead, go and kill as many as you can in the village. When the mob finished looting and burning it was then that the police used tear gas. Had the police stopped the mob, there would have not been such a huge loss and Ibrahimbhai would not have died.
8. Vinay Singh who is a member of the BJP and also a lawyer, he has played a very crucial role in the entire incident. He was leading the mob and he directed the mob in various directions to loot, kill and burn.
9. Ibrahimbhai who died in the violence, his body reached Vadavali village from Chanasma Government hospital on 26/3/17. The people in the village decided that the last rites of Ibrahimbhai will not be conducted, his body will not be buried until the accused were arrested. The police was quite rattled by this and hence the village elders agreed to perform the last rites after the range IG gave an assurance that the accused would be arrested. The entire village including people from various communities participated in the burial of Ibrahimbhai.
10. Khorsan is a village close to Vadavali, the Thakor’s of Sunsar had threatened the Muslims of Khorsan that if they helped any Muslim from Vadavali their village too will meet with the same fate as Vadavali. It is interesting to note that for the past 4-5 years the Muslims of Khorsan village have themselves been excommunicated. They are not allowed to associate with any of the people of the Hindu community, this was decided by the Hindu community of the village. Just after a member of the Muslim community filed his nomination for the Panchayat election, the community had started interacting with the rest of the village normally only since the last 15 days. The deputy Sarpanch was Muslim person who was unanimously elected.
11. The miscreants have also recorded the whole incident on video and have also posted it on social media to display their gallantry in sparking communal violence.

Observation:
Across Gujarat communally coloured incidents are becoming rampant and also in a very organised manner. This is also dividing the both the communities on the lines of hatred, the communal powers are also moving ahead in an organised manner, the incident at Vadavali is one such example.
The Vidhansabha elections in Gujarat are due, BJP is strategically using violence through its various wings, to create a communal tension in the atmosphere.

Factfinding Team:
Advocate Samshad Khan Pathan, Jan Sangharsh Manch
Advocate Govind Parmar, Human Rights Law Network
Hozefa Ujjain, Jan Vikas, Gujarat
Kherunisa Pathan, Parvaz Organization, Gujarat
Dashrat Bhai Thakor, Action Aid
Usman Bhai Sheikh, Aman Biradri
Asim Shaikh, Jan Sangharsh Manch
Makrani Mir Khan, Aantarik Vistapit Committee
and other social workers
 

The post Targeted Violence Preparing Ground for Assembly Elections,Gujarat: Factfinding Report appeared first on SabrangIndia.

1984 Anti-Sikh Massacre. Photo courtesy: Caravan Magazine

A number can also tell a story. Yes. A number. A digit. It is immaterial whether the story makes you feel sad or it brings a smile on your lips. But a number can be associated with some names, some places, some details and many other things. And those elements are enough to build a story.

I am going to share with you the story of a number that is permanently etched on my memory. But I am sure it won't make you happy. Knowing that, I still would like to share it with you. It's not that I want to make you feel sad. All I want is to make you think, so that you get offended and angry. Why? I will tell you later. First let me tell you the story. And by the way, it's a story based on real events and not a fiction. 

The number that is on my mind is four. Yes. Number "4"; that reminds me of series of numbers that continue to haunt me.

The very first combination of digits that remind me of number 4 is 1984. How? Very simple. Add them all. 1+9+8+4. That makes it 10+12 = 22. Now add 2 and 2 and you will get 4. Therefore, I associate "4" with 1984, an unforgettable year.

For me number four is not just a reminder of ominous political events but also a key to keep our memory alive to make people in power accountable.

I was fourteen at that time. We lived in Amritsar, the holiest city of the Sikhs. The most sacred shrine of the Sikhs, the Golden Temple complex, is in that city. The temple had come under military invasion that year in the month of June. The then Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi had sent army to the temple to flush out handful of militants who had turned it into a fortress.

They were angry with the government that was not listening to the demands of the Sikhs, who were fighting against discrimination and seeking some rights and privileges. The Hindus felt threatened by the militants who carried out armed insurgency from inside the shrine. While Hindus make 80 percent of the Indian population, they are only 40 percent in Punjab where Sikhs are in the majority. The Sikhs makes only about two percent of the national population. These numbers too explain a lot, but I need to focus on number 4.

Political killings and the mass murders of Hindus resulted in the army invasion on the temple leaving many devotees dead and the buildings inside the complex destroyed. The Sikhs were outraged and there were angry protests across the world. Sikhs felt that the attack was avoidable and was planned to please Hindu majority to win the forthcoming national elections.

After the siege was lifted and people were given access to the Golden Temple, our family also visited the place. The image of destruction inside shook me completely. Since I was born and raised in a Sikh family, as a teenager I could not control my emotions after seeing in front of me bullet marks everywhere. 

In October that year, the news came that Indira Gandhi has been murdered by her Sikh bodyguards who were seeking revenge for the invasion. But the story did not end there. Following her murder, Sikhs outside Punjab came under organized attacks by mobs led by the members of her Congress Party. We were always told that the Congress is a secular party that believes in equality and denounces religious fanaticism. But now, everything seemed to have gone wrong. Sikh men were being burnt alive and their women being raped by goons incited by Congress men. An entire community was being taught a lesson for the murder of Indira Gandhi by just two Sikh men.

We were worried about our relatives outside Punjab. Fortunately, nothing untoward happened to them, but they had to live through fear. They survived mainly because of their Hindu neighbours, who not only ensured their safety but also because they stayed indoors during the violence.

Why was the government doing this to its own citizens? First it invaded their place of worship and now it was targeting ordinary Sikhs everywhere? The mystery was over soon. It was election time and Indira's son Rajiv Gandhi was elected to power with a brute majority. His slogan for "national unity" in the wake of his mother's death paid him the dividends.

The invasion of the Golden Temple was justified in the name of national unity. The Sikh militants were accused of getting support from foreign powers, who the government claimed were bent upon dividing India. Indira Gandhi's assassination was also seen by her supporters as a terrorist act committed under international conspiracy. No evidence was needed to prove that Sikhs were targeted to win the election that followed these horrible events.

Survivors of the Bhopal Gas Tragedy march for justice. Photo credit: Indian Express

Before we move further I want to quickly add here that the year 1984 was also very painful for the people of Bhopal. In December that year, following large-scale repression of Sikhs a month earlier, one of the biggest industrial disasters struck the city. Gas leakage at the Union Carbide plant killed many people and left many blinded and the drinking water contaminated.

The CEO of the company Warren Anderson who was from US was allowed to leave the country. Slowly it became visible to everyone that the plant was constructed at a wrong place despite warnings of a possible accident in future. This could only have happened in exchange of favours given by the owners of the plant to the corrupt leaders of the Congress who ruled both in Delhi and in Madhya Pradesh, the state where Bhopal is located.

Obviously, Anderson was given a safe exit as part of cover up. A similar cover up was used to hide the complicity of the government in the massacre of Sikhs. Both the poor slum dwellers who lost their lives in Bhopal and the Sikhs who were systematically murdered became numbers that remain irrelevant for the privileged society and the ruling classes of India whose constitution guarantees social and economic equality.

In his first public reaction to the criticism of violence against Sikhs, Rajiv Gandhi shortly after assuming the post of the Prime Minister had remarked, “When a big tree falls, earth around it shakes a bit.” The statement itself was a part of the cover up. Gandhi tried to make everyone believe that it was a reaction of people over the death of their beloved leader. Clearly, he did not want to acknowledge the complicity of the state machinery in the massacre.

His big lie could not cover another historic reality.

Photo credit: The Hindu

The year 1948 again reminds me of number 4, a much bigger tree had fallen, but the earth did not shake at all.

Mahatma Gandhi was assassinated by a Marathi Hindu extremist. That Gandhi, like it or not, was much more respected than Indira and Rajiv. Yet, Marathi Hindus did not become target of such madness. For that matter when Rajiv Gandhi was killed by Tamil separatists in 1991, Tamil Hindus were not punished by the mobs belonging to his Congress party.

Both the Sikhs and the sufferers of Bhopal tragedy continue to await justice. No senior Congress leader has been convicted until now. HKL Bhagat, one of the top-notch leaders involved in the carnage, died after illness while others continue to move around freely. Anderson too remained unpunished.

The precedent of dividing people, letting big shots involved in deaths of civilians go scot free and allowing impunity for crimes was already set by the year 2002. You read it right; 2002 that also equals 4.

Photo credit: Firstpost

I had moved to Canada by then. The current Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi was the chief minister of Gujarat back in that time.

The birthplace of Mahatma Gandhi – who was opposed to Hindu theocracy and was murdered for this reason – went up into flames. Muslims became target of violence by the supporters of Modi’s Hindu Nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) that believes in Hindu theocracy. Not surprisingly, some of its hawkish leaders consider Nathuram Godse, the assassin of Mahatma Gandhi as their hero. The BJP happens to be the political wing of the ultra-Hindu supremacist group Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS) that was banned after Mahatma Gandhi’s death. Godse was an RSS man.

In 2002, the 1984 technique that was applied on the Sikhs to avenge the assassination of the then prime minister was repeated to terrorise Muslims.

The massacre followed the burning of a train bringing Hindu pilgrims from the disputed site of Ayodhya. The Hindus believe that it is the birthplace of their revered god, Lord Rama. The BJP supporters claim that the original temple built there was demolished by Babar – a Muslim emperor long ago to build a mosque. The BJP has always desired to build a grand Ram temple at the exact location [Editors’ note: The Ram temple became an issue for the BJP only in mid-1980s]. In 1992, they gathered there and razed the Babari mosque. Since then the place remains a point of conflict.

The Hindu pilgrims were returning from Ayodhya after performing prayers at a make shift Rama temple in February 2002. Some of the supporters of BJP had harassed Muslim passengers and vendors at railway stations along the route. Under these circumstances, a compartment of the Sabarmati Express caught fire leaving over 50 passengers dead. Though one commission of enquiry found that it was an accident, the Modi government blamed Muslim extremists allegedly supported by Pakistan.

Hell broke out on Muslims throughout Gujarat after the mobs were given free hand to kill and loot with the help of police.  

Modi won another round of Assembly election for the BJP in the aftermath of the massacre with a huge mandate. He also fought the election on the plank of threat to national security from Pakistan-based terrorists. Much like Rajiv Gandhi, he also tried to rationalise the bloodshed and violence by saying that every action has an equal and opposite reaction. In a way, he was using a similar argument with some variation to cover up the complicity of the state in crimes against humanity.

The events of 2002 are the culmination of politics of hate started much earlier. Down the road I won’t be surprised to come across more such connections.  

I have not shared these details to promote numerology or suggest that number four is unlucky. This is just my story. Because I associate the number with these gory incidents it does not mean that number four should be considered ominous by all. You may have some sweet memories associated with the number four. Likewise, for others some other numbers might bring worse memories than the ones I shared.

For the oppressed groups, like Dalits or so-called untouchables, the LGBT, the tribals, the indigenous peoples, women and the disabled every day is an ugly reminder of structural violence and injustice. For them my version of number four or the events related to the years, 1948, 1984 or 2002 might not mean anything. From their perspective, much worse incidents might have occurred between 1948 and 2002 and continue even now.

This is not to suggest either that the incidents I have listed were the only tragedies that happened during those years. The story I have shared is more to do with keeping our memories alive however painful they might be, because those in power want us to forget. They want to erase these memories to deny us justice. For me number four is not just a reminder of ominous political events but also a key to keep our memory alive to make people in power accountable.
 

The post Why Number ‘4’ is Ominous for Me appeared first on SabrangIndia.