Two weeks after a 13-year-old died under suspicious circumstances, allegedly after a brutal rape, in Chokhar ki Dhani near Hayatpur village, the Gurugram Police have formed a special investigation team (SIT) to investigate the case. According to a report in The Tribune, the main accused who had been “nabbed earlier was again produced in a city court and SIT took him again on a six-day police remand”. The victim’s father alleged that three persons were involved, however, the police reportedly “have no clue about the other accused yet.”

The 13-year-old lived with her family in Narela, Delhi, but died under mysterious circumstances in Chokhar ki Dhani near Hayatpur village on August 23. According to news reports, the girl was brought to Gurugram by her landlord’s wife who wanted the girl to work as a nanny to a relative’s newborn son. The victim’s father told the media that after the 13-year-old had died, the landlord “was in a hurry to get the last rites done”. He further said, “But I suspected that they had killed my daughter. So, I got the postmortem done. The postmortem report now revealed that my daughter was not only raped by the accused but was also thrashed by them as her nose was found broken in the postmortem report. Gurugram police nabbed one accused so far but I want other accused to be nabbed also.”

The father has also alleged in the FIR that the landlord’s brother-in-law identified as one Praveen Verma, along with others, killed his daughter. Praveen Verma has been arrested, stated media reports. The victim’s father had made a PCR call “when the accused allegedly tried to force the family to cremate the body.” Reports cite the FIR based on the father’s complaint as saying, “On July 17, my landlord’s wife said that her sister-in-law had given birth to a child and she was taking my daughter along with her to her brother’s home in Gurgaon. She also said that my daughter would stay there and could play with the daughter of her brother.”

On August 23, the victim’s father was informed by his landlord that his daughter was dead. The FIR added that “they took the body in a private ambulance to the girl’s Narela residence for cremation.” However, the father got suspicious, and called the police emergency number. “Narela police station staff reached the spot, and took the body to the Babu Jagjivan Ram hospital in Jahangirpuri,” stated the FIR as quoted in news reports.

The Gurgaon Police reportedly registered a case under Sections 302 (murder) and 120B (punishment of criminal conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code and SC/ST Act. It was reported that additional “sections were added in the FIR after the postmortem report confirmed sexual assault, and Verma was arrested.”

Related:

Delhi: Women’s group calls upon media to cover the ire of Nangal villagers
Delhi Cantonment rape case: AIDWA demands action against police for alleged ‘silent complicity’
Nangal village gang-rape, both gendered and caste-based violence: Civil Society Organisations
And now, Hathras-like horror in Delhi!

The post Gurugram police set up SIT, 14 days after alleged rape and murder of 13 year old girl appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Hours after the body of the 19-year-old Dalit gang rape victim was forcibly cremated by Uttar Pradesh officials, even as her grieving family was allegedly kept away from the spot and denied the right to perform the last rite, the state’s Chief Minister has said that he has constituted a Special investigation Team (SIT), and will take action.

He said this has been done “after a conversation with Respected Prime Minister @narendramodi Ji, who had spoken on the Hathras incident and said that strict action should be taken against the culprits.”

आदरणीय प्रधानमंत्री श्री @narendramodi जी ने हाथरस की घटना पर वार्ता की है और कहा है कि दोषियों के विरुद्ध कठोरतम कार्रवाई की जाए।

— Yogi Adityanath (@myogiadityanath) September 30, 2020

It took the CM 15 days, after the Dalit teenager’s rape and torture by ‘upper caste’ men was reported, and over 24 hours after the victim died, to react. Citizens and women’s groups, as well as secular parties have been protesting on the streets of Delhi and Uttar Pradesh, demanding action and even the resignation of the UP CM for the way he has been handling the deteriorating law and order situation in his state. Protests began soon after the girl died of her injuries at a Delhi hospital earlier on Tuesday, September 29. The system failed her, and her family once again, in the hours that followed, and the teenager was cremated around 3 AM on Wednesday, September 30. Her family was kept away.

Even the leaders who were voted to power from the state continued to bury their head in the sand. A case in point is Smriti Z Irani, the Union Cabinet Minister for Women & Child Development. She was elected from Uttar Pradesh’s Amethi Lok Sabha Constituency, and many years ago was seen protesting against rapes, but that was during the UPA regime. Today she retweeted official statements of fast track investigations etc, issued by the UP government. And then moved her focus on the Babri Masjid demolition verdict that has acquitted her party seniors today, and then congratulated the people of Amethi and thanked the UP CM for launching district joint hospital.

कोविड-19 से प्रभावी ढंग से लड़ने के लिए स्वास्थ्य क्षेत्र में आधारभूत ढांचा विकास की दिशा में अमेठी में 100 बेड वाला लेवल-2 जिला संयुक्त चिकित्सालय का लोकार्पण कर जनपद को और सक्षम व मजबूत बनाने के लिए यशस्वी मुख्यमंत्री @myogiadityanath जी का धन्यवाद एवं अमेठीवासियों को बधाई।

— Smriti Z Irani (@smritiirani) September 30, 2020

However, the opposition is taking the issue head on saying, “It is 30th, this was the first time the UP CM has spoken, and what does he say? That the PM called and I constituted the SIT?” Congress general secretary Priyanka Gandhi Vadra, lashed out at Adityanath on his response and said, “What kind of a CM are you,? Where were you sleeping for the last 14 days? Why didn’t you act?”

मैं यूपी के मुख्यमंत्री जी से कुछ सवाल पूछना चाहती हूँ-

परिजनों से जबरदस्ती छीन कर पीड़िता के शव को जलवा देने का आदेश किसने दिया?

पिछले 14 दिन से कहां सोए हुए थे आप? क्यों हरकत में नहीं आए?

और कब तक चलेगा ये सब? कैसे मुख्यमंत्री हैं आप? pic.twitter.com/Q2qPcDXDTT

— Priyanka Gandhi Vadra (@priyankagandhi) September 30, 2020

The strongest statement so far has come from the All India Progressive Women’s Association ( AIPWA). The AIPWA has called the incident “Hathras Caste Supremacist Atrocity” and said “While the horrific nature of her injuries has been the focus of some attention in the media and social media, what has largely escaped attention is the horror of systematic caste supremacist treatment meted out to the victim and her family and community by the UP police, administration, and the Yogi and Modi Governments.” 

It  added that the Hathras police, when faced with the victim writhing in pain on the floor of the local police station, had initially claimed that the victim was faking her pain to “trap” the accused. The victim was denied adequate medical treatment for nearly a week. The victim and her family were denied dignity even in death and grief, said AIPWA as the police and District administration rejected the grieving family’s desperate pleas that they be allowed to take her body home one last time. 

The statement added that the “refusal of the UP Govt and its machinery to allow a Dalit family the right to grieve their daughter and bid her farewell in keeping with their own emotions and customs, reeks of caste supremacy.” It also pointed out that the UP CM, “who shares a caste identity and caste supremacist ideology with the perpetrators, has maintained a deafening silence on the matter… the Thakur CM has carefully avoided acknowledging the incomparable grief of the parents and loved ones of a teenage Dalit woman, brutalised and killed by Thakur men.”

The UP CM has recently announced a “Durachari” scheme whereby the photographs of rape accused persons will be displayed in public all over UP.  According to AIPWA as it is known “that all over India, nearly half of the rape complaints that are filed, are attempts by women’s parents to criminalise consensual elopements, especially inter caste and inter community relationships. So the scheme will be an excuse to further humiliate and stigmatise Dalit, OBC and Muslim men who are in relationships with women of dominant castes. Far from deterring crimes against women, the scheme will actually be a crime against women’s autonomy and right to choose a partner.”

With 51,824 cases of crimes against SCs registered under PoA Act between 2009 and 2018, UP ranks first in the category with 22.38% of total crimes. Of all crimes committed against the members of the Scheduled Castes, the highest are against Dalit women, the 2016 National Crime Records Bureau, the last data released nationally, shows. In recent months, there have been a spate of sexual assaults on women, children and Dalit women in particular, in UP, stated AIPWA, adding that “it is no secret that Yogi Raj in UP has emboldened Manuvadi forces to commit crimes in service of their caste supremacist ideology. The UP CM has made no secret he shares this ideology: in an infamous article in 2009, he had quoted Manusmriti to argue against women’s reservations in Assembly and Parliament on the grounds that women ought always to be kept under the control of men.”

The AIPWA has demanded justice for the Hathras victim and that the rapists be punished, it has also demanded “that the secret midnight cremation of the victim’s body without the presence of her parents and family be treated as a caste atrocity and senior police and administration officials be arrested and prosecuted under the PoA Act for this crime.”

The  AIPWA national executive warned that “the UP Govt and police must not seek to silence protest and cover up their complicity by eliminating the perpetrators in a fake encounter. AIPWA will do everything it can to support the victim’s family in their quest for justice and accountability from the UP government and Central government.”

The Polit Bureau of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) has also issued a following statement condemning the “actions of the Adityanath Government on the blatant denial of justice to the Hathras dalit rape victim and her family. Her death is the result of the callous approach of the Government.” It added that the “barbaric caste based rape crime is reflective of the utter lawlessness in UP under the BJP Government and the patronage given to casteist and reactionary forces leading to a big increase in crimes against dalits and women”. The CPI(M) has also demanded action against the police personnel who refused to file an FIR and also against those responsible for the forcible cremation.

Women, youth & student organisations held a militant protest today outside UP Bhavan in Delhi against the barbaric gangrape and murder of the 19 year Dalit girl from Hathras. The police under the Union Home Ministry severely manhandled the protesters & arrested them.#HathrasCase pic.twitter.com/5bQ8V8GKmS

— CPI (M) (@cpimspeak) September 30, 2020

Meanwhile, the District Magistrate, who is representing the state Govt, seemed to be at a loss of words when reporters questioned him. The UP police had cited DM orders were cited by @Uppolice for cremating the victim’s body. However, he did not share any details and stuck to the official notes.

See how reporters question the system! Family was on their way. Villagers were screaming as witnessesed by @TanushreePande . Yet DM orders were cited by @Uppolice for cremating the victim’s body. #Hathras #HathrasHorror pic.twitter.com/GAZ1SXrXXQ

— Milan Sharma (@Milan_reports) September 30, 2020

He, however, did mention the monetary compensation that was promised to the victim’s family.

चंदपा थाना वाले प्रकरण में पीड़िता के परिजनों को पूर्व में 4,12,500 रुपए की आर्थिक सहायता दी गई थी। आज 5,87,500 रुपए की सहायता और दी जा रही है। इस प्रकार कुल 10 लाख रुपए की आर्थिक सहायता की गई है।@AwasthiAwanishK @ShishirGoUP@hathraspolice

— DM Hathras (@dm_hathras) September 29, 2020

Related:

Hathras Dalit girl rape: Why are Smriti Irani, PM Modi, UP CM Adityanath quiet
Do the dead have rights in India?
Lynched, raped, left for dead: Dalits, women remain easy targets for criminals in UP
How many rapes and murders will it take before the UP govt takes action?

The post Hathras rape a case of Caste Supremacist Atrocity: AIPWA appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Image Courtesy: PTI

Sharad Kalaskar, a Sanatan Sanstha (SS) sympathiser is now in the custody of the Special Investigation Team (SIT) of the Maharashtra police that is investigating the assassination of communist leader Govind Pansare. Kalaskar is said to have destroyed the weapons used to shoot at Pansare and his wife. As Newsclick had reported earlier, Kalaskar has confided in the Karnataka Special Investigation Team (SIT) that Sanjeev Punalekar – the lawyer of Sanatan Sanstha (SS) – had called him to his office in June-July 2018. The lawyer is said to have asked Kalaskar to destroy the gun he used to allegedly murder Narendra Dabholkar, Govind Pansare, M M Kalburgi and Gauri Lankesh. Punalekar and his assistant Vikram Bhave have been arrested by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on May 25, 2019 related to the case of Dabholkar.

Kalaskar was earlier arrested by the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad in the infamous Nallsopara explosives hoarding case. An officer from the SIT probing the Pansare case told The Indian Express: “Kalaskar was taken into our custody from Mumbai, in the early hours of Tuesday and produced before the court in Kolhapur in the afternoon. The court has remanded him to our custody till June 18. He is the seventh person to be arrested and ninth person to have been named as accused in the case till now.” Kalaskar along with Sachin Andure allegedly assassinated, rationalist Dabholkar on August 30, 2013, according to the CBI that is investigating the case.

The investigations in both Pansare’s and Dabholkar’s cases have been very lethargic. In November 2018, the Mumbai High Court had questioned the CBI and the Maharashtra SIT for delaying the investigation into the murders of activists Dabholkar and Pansare. The investigative agency has been severely criticised by civil society groups both in Maharashtra and across the country for being extremely slow in its investigation. The High Court is now monitoring both the cases.

Investigation into Pansare’s case so far
One must note that there has been no real progress in the case. Pansare was attacked by two unidentified gunmen in Kolhapur, on February 16, 2015. He died on February 20. He was a member of the Communist Party of India and a supporter of Dabholkar’s movement. He was a vehement critic of Hindutva organisations. An SIT had implicated Virendra Tawde, Sarang Akolkar and Vinay Pawar – suspects in the Dabholkar murder case – in the Pansare case as well, in 2016. Here too, Tawade was named as a key conspirator, and Akolkar and Pawar were suspected of firing at Pansare. However Tawade was granted bail by the Kolhapur court in 2018; and both Akolkar and Pawar have been absconding since the Margao blast in 2009.

In its 400-page-long chargesheet, the SIT also had named Amol Kale, Vasudev Suryawanshi, Bharat Kurne and Amit Digwekar. However, both Kale and Digwekar are named in other cases too. Kale who was taken into custody by the Karnataka SIT in the case of  Lankesh is now known to be involved in planning all the four — Dabholkar, Pansare, M M Kalburgi and Lankesh — assassination and also recruiting people to execute the plan.

When Parashuram Waghmore, who was arrested on June 12, 2018, confessed to have shot at Lankesh to the SIT, a larger conspiracy had come to light. An unnamed SIT official had mentioned the existence of a gang of hardline Hindutva recruits functioning in five states: Madhya Pradesh, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Goa and Karnataka. The same official is reported to have said that this “unnamed organisation/gang” comprises at least 60 people and has “recruited people from hardline Hindutva organisations like Maharashtra-based SS and HJS.” As investigations into these cases continued, it was in fact established that all those arrested were involved in all the four cases and were also members of SS and HJS.

It is the same set of men, being named in all the cases by three different investigative agencies but the shooters are different in each of the cases. However, the shooter in the case of  Pansare is still not been named. It is also important to note that, the arrests made so far do not go higher up the ranks of the hardline Hindutva organisations. Punalekar is the highest the investigative agencies have been able to reach. Why is this the case? We now know who are all the men involved in these assassinations, the reason and their affiliations. The question of who is the mastermind behind these assassinations, remains unanswered.
 
Courtesy: Indian Cultural Forum

The post Is the Probe into Pansare’s Murder Just Skimming the Surface? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The four men who are all on the run are wanted for their alleged role in the Samjhauta Express, Mecca Masjid, Ajmer Dargah and Malegaon terror attacks, had conducted explosives training at secret terror camps organised at 19 locations across India for people linked to the Sanatan Sanstha.

According to submissions made by the SIT before a Bangalore court, seven people; three Sanatan Sanstha members arrested in the Gauri Lankesh murder case and four witnesses who attended these training camps, said that a “babaji” and four “gurujis” were present at the training camps.

The “babaji” has been identified as Suresh Nair of Abhinav Bharat. He is an accused in the 2007 Ajmer Dargah blast case. Nair was arrested in November 2018, after being on the run for 11 years! Three others; Ramji Kalsangra, Sandeep Dange and Ashwini Chauhan were identified as bomb experts who conducted training at the secret camps.

Kalsangra and Dange have been declared “proclaimed offenders” in the 2008 Malegaon blast case in which BJP’s Bhopal candidate Sadhvi Pragya Thakur is also one of the accused. However, the SIT denied her involvement in the Gauri Lankesh murder case. In a statement, the SIT reportedly said, “SIT has not found in its investigation or mentioned in the charge sheet any link to Sadhvi Pragya, Malegaon blasts, Abhinav Bharat.” It added, “There is no evidence to suggest the same. No documents purporting the same have been submitted to the court.”

Meanwhile, both Kalsangra and Dange are also wanted in the Samjhauta Express blast case alsong with Ashwini Chauhan. The fifth bomb expert has been identified as Pratap Hazra of the Bhavani Sena in West Bengal. The five are alleged to have conducted training in camps spread across Maharashtra Gujarat and Karnataka. Men like Amit Degwekar and Amit Baddi, both key accused in the Gauri Lankesh murder case attended these camps.

This points to the common thread connecting the murders of rationalists MM Kalburgi, Narendra Dabholkar and Govind Pansare, and journalist Gauri Lankesh with right wing supremacist groups accused of involvement in terror attacks.
 

The post SIT finds Blast Accused conducted Bomb Training for Right Wing Supremacists appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Belagavi district magistrate court has permitted the Belagavi police to reopen investigations into the petrol bomb attack on Prakash Theatre that was screening Bollywood film Padmaavat. According to The Indian Express report, the move follows the ongoing investigations by the Special Investigation Team (SIT) into the murder of journalist Gauri Lankesh.

The SIT investigations had revealed a conspiracy by a radical Hindu group to kill the rationalists and “anti-Hindutva” activists, and the same investigation has also uncovered that the same group was behind all the attacks on theatre screenings of the movie Padmaavat in Maharashtra and Karnataka.

On January 25, 2018, two unidentified persons had hurled two petrol bombs at the theatre, causing panic and cancellation of the shows. The Indian Express has reported that Amol Kale, the main accused in the Gauri Lankesh case, had also engineered the plan to attack theatres. Kale is former convenor of the Hindu terrorist outfit Sanatan Sanstha (SS). The SIT had recovered a diary from Kale which had uncovered a conspiracy to kill various rationalists and plans to attack theatres. According to this report, Kale had noted, “Throw stones at the entrance. Use petrol bomb on the vehicles. Use crackers and rods at the ticket counter. Make fake calls, and throw pamphlet. Theatre audience and producer will have loss,’’ ahead of the attacks.

Sharad Kalaskar and Sudhanva Gondhalekar were earlier arrested by the Maharashtra Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) for allegedly hoarding explosives and plotting terrorism activities. They also are linked to the murder of Narendra Dabholkar and Lankesh. Kalaskar is a member of SS, while Gondhalekar is a member of SS as well as of Shivpratishthan Hindustan. The ATS had told the Pune sessions court that the information decoded from Kalaskar’s computer brought to the light the fact that they were planning to bomb the venue of the Sunburn Festival in Pune and screenings of movie Padmavat at cinema houses in Belgaum and in Kalyan, reported allaboutbelgaum.com.

Sanatan Sanstha and Bombs
For the SS, bombs, explosives and other weapons are a necessity to establish what they call a Hindu Rashtra (Hindu nation). It is a necessity because one of the ways according to Jayant Balaji Athavale – founder of the SS – to establish Hindu Rashtra, one has to kill those who oppose the Hindu Rashtra project. This is not the first time that the SS or its associates are named in violent attacks in the name of Hindutva.

The activists of the SS have been arrested in several bomb blast cases in the past. The organisation was also accused, and two of its supporters were given 10-year imprisonment for bomb blasts in the Gadkari Rangayatan auditorium in Thane on June 4, 2008. This was apparently done to protest against a Marathi play, Amhi Pachpute, which they had claimed, showed Hindu gods in a poor light. Those who were arrested are currently out on the bail.

The Goa police arrested six SS members involved in a bomb blast in Madgaon, Goa, in October 2009. According to the police, two SS supporters, Malgonda Patil and Yogesh Naik, were allegedly carrying a bomb in their scooter, to plant it near the Narkasur effigy competition in Madgaon. The duo died as the bomb went off prematurely.

The National Investigation Agency (NIA), which had taken over the investigations, has alleged that an SS member, who was an engineering student, played a key role in preparing the improvised explosive devices (IED) and carrying detonators and timer devices for the blast. However, all six were acquitted, and some of the SS members still remain absconding. All of these attacks were in the name of “protecting” the Hindu religion.

Courtesy: Indian Cultural Forum
 

The post Accused in Lankesh Murder Case Also ‘Planned’ to Bomb Padmaavat Screenings appeared first on SabrangIndia.

 
Besides Amicus Curaie Raju Ramachandran’s Report to the SC clearly stated that Modi should stand trial for offences under Section 153(a), 153(b) and166 of the Indian Penal Code.
 
Key Points of May 2010 SIT Report Contrasted with 2012 Closure Report
 
I. Callous and Communal Mindset of Modi (chief minister and state home minister since 2002)
 

 
 
SIT Closure Report (2012): While the amicus finds the words spoken by the chief minister an offence, an incitement to violence and hatred against a particular section of the Indian people, in its closure report, the SIT finds that no criminal offence has been committed and recommends a closure of these allegations.

On the ‘action-reaction’ statement: “As per Modi’s version, he had not and would never justify any action or reaction by a mob against innocents. He had denied all allegations in this regard.” Zee TV never sent a copy of the interview, says the SIT. Their correspondent Sudhir Chaudhary told the SIT the Editors’ Guild report contained only excerpts and he did not have the original CD. He did recollect Modi’s reply that a mob “had reacted on account of private firing done by Jaffri, the SIT says. Chaudhary told the SIT Modi was of the view that he wanted neither action nor reaction. Modi reportedly said: “Godhra mein parson hua… jiski pratikriya ho rahi hai” but Chaudhary could not recount the exact sequence” (pgs 482-483, SIT Closure Report).
 
“As regards the public speech delivered at Becharaji, Mehsana district, on September 9, 2002, as a part of Gaurav Yatra, Modi has explained that the speech did not refer to any particular community or religion. According to  Modi, this was a political speech in which he has pointed out the increasing   population of India and had remarked that ‘can’t Gujarat implement family       planning?’ Modi has claimed that his speech has been distorted by some  interested elements who had misinterpreted the same to suit their designs. He has also stated that there were no riots or tension after his election speech. No    criminality has come on record in respect of this aspect of allegation” (p. 272, SIT Closure Report).
 
F. Modi Government Took No Steps to Stop Illegal Bandh. According to the SIT report of 2010 to the SC, the Gujarat government did not take any steps to stop the illegal bandh called by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad on 28 February 2002. On the contrary the BJP had supported the bandh. (Page 69, SIT Report to SC, May 2010)
(It is important to remember that it was Hindu mobs mobilised by the local VHP and BJP leaders in the name of bandhs that had carried out the horrific massacres at Naroda and Gulberg Society on 28 February 2002 and those all over the state over the next days. March 1 was a state wise bandh when massacres at Randhikpur-Sanjeli, Sardarpura, Sesan, Odh, Pandharwada and Kidiad among others took place)

G. Modi as Home Minister did not Act to prosecute Hate Speech. According to the SIT report of 2010 to the SC, despite detailed reports recommending strict action submitted to Modi by field officers of the State Intelligence Bureau, Modi as Home Minister failed to take action against a section of the print media that was publishing communally- inciting reports, inflaming base emotions. This had vitiated the communal situation further. (Page 79, SIT Report to SC, May 2010)

H. Modi as Home Minister responsible for Destruction of Crucial Records. The 2010 SIT report to the SC says “The Gujarat government has reportedly destroyed the police wireless communication of the period pertaining to the riots.” It adds, “No records, documentations or minutes of the crucial law and order meetings held by the government during the riots had been kept.” (Page 13, SIT Report to SC, May 2010)

II. SIT Confirms the Serious Allegation that Godhra Dead Bodies were handed over to Jaideep Patel of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad in an illegal and controversial move. Jaideep Patel of the VHP was also allowed to attend an official meeting at the Collectorate, Godhra.
In the 2010 SIT Report to the SC, the SIT says, “SIT inquiry revealed that there was in fact a discussion at Godhra on the final disposal of bodies of those killed in the Godhra carnage. This was during chief minister Narendra Modi’s visit to the town on the afternoon of February 27, 2002. It was held at the collectorate. It is not clear who all were present or consulted. Apart from the district collector, the presence at least of Gordhan Zadaphiya (MoS, home) and Jaideep Patel, VHP activist, has been confirmed…..”… (pgs 19-23, SIT Report to the SC, May 2010; pgs 2-3, Chairman’s Comments, SIT report to SC May 2010).

 SIT Closure Report 8.2.2012 also admits that Jaideep Patel transported the dead bodies to Ahmedabad
“The above facts would go to establish that though a letter had been addressed by mamlatdar, Godhra, to Patel of VHP….Nalvaya, mamlatdar, has acted in an irresponsible manner by issuing a letter in the name [of] Patel in token of having handed over the dead bodies which were case property and therefore the government of Gujarat is being requested to initiate departmental proceedings against him” (p. 463, Closure Report).
 
III. Narendra Modi did hold a meeting on 27 February 2002.
But Did he tell his officers to let Hindus vent their anger freely against Muslims? SIT claims there is no conclusive evidence but holds that no minutes of an Official law and Order Meeting (as is Standard Operational Procedure) were maintained.
In arriving at its conclusion that ‘there is no conclusive evidence’ of the criminal statement by Modi, the SIT has discarded the evidentiary statements of Justices PB Sawant, Hosbet Suresh, former MOS Revenue, GOG, Haren Pandya, Suresh Mehta, and Sanjiv Bhatt. It has accepted the evidence of those IAS and IPS officers who are co-accused in the Zakia Jafri Complaint dated 8.6.2006 that include former chief secretary Subha Rao, former ACS Home Ashok Narayan, former DGP, K Chakavarthi, former Principal Secretary, CMO, PK Mishra, former Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad, PC Pande.

SIT Report to SC in May 2010 “In the light of the above, a law and order meeting was in fact held by Modi at his residence late in the evening of February 27. However, the allegation that chief minister instructed the chief secretary, DGP and other senior officials to allow the Hindu community to give vent to their anger on the minority Muslims in the wake of Godhra incident is not established” (p. 19,  SIT report to SC, May 2010).

IV. SIT Accepts that in a Controversial Move Ministers were stationed in the Ahmedabad City and State Control Rooms
 The SIT Report to the SC, May 2010, says, in an extremely “controversial” move, the government of Gujarat had placed two senior ministers — Ashok Bhatt and IK Jadeja — in the Ahmedabad city police control room and the state police control room during the riots. The SIT chairman comments that the two ministers were positioned in the control rooms with “no definite charter”, fuelling the speculation that they “had been placed to interfere in police work and give wrongful decisions to the field officers”. “The fact that he (Modi) was the cabinet minister for Home would heighten the suspicion that this decision had his blessings.” (Page 12 of chairman’s comments in SIT report to SC, May 2010)
(It is to be noted that Ashok Bhatt’s cell phone analysis showed that he was in touch with VHP leader Jaideep Patel, a key conspirator of the Naroda Gaon and Naroda Patiya massacre, and with Gordhan Zadaphia, the then minister of state for home and who is now seen by the SIT as a major culprit of the Ahmedabad massacres.)

SIT Closure Report (8.2.2012) also admits that Ministers were stationed in the Control Rooms, Ahmedabad and State but says it was not a “significant” presence
“Therefore the allegation that the two ministers were positioned in the state control room and Ahmedabad city police control room by the chief minister is not established. Significantly, IK Jadeja remained at state police headquarters for two-three hours as per his own admission but did not interfere in the police functioning. Late Ashok Bhatt’s presence in the city police headquarters on the relevant day, if any, was very negligible and it cannot be termed of any material value. In the absence of documentary/oral evidence of any directions given by these two ministers to police officials, it cannot be said at this stage that they conspired in the perpetration of riots or did not take any action to control the riots” (pgs 474-475, SIT Closure Report, 8.2.2012).
 
V. Criminally Negligent Actions by Joint CP Tandon and SCP PB Gondia who were subsequently rewarded by the Modi government for their criminality.
The former Ahmedabad joint commissioner of police MK Tandon, in whose area around 200 Muslims were killed, has been found guilty of deliberate dereliction of duty. (Post the riots, however, far from being censored, he got one lucrative posting after another and retired as additional director general of police in June 2007.) His junior, former deputy commissioner of police PK Gondia, has also been found guilty of willfully allowing the massacres. The SIT says that if the two had just carried out their duty hundreds of Muslims could have been saved. (Pages 48-50 of the SIT Report to the SC, May 2010) Neither of these officers was held accountable by the Modi government. The first SIT report recommended further investigation as has been detailed at Annexure 2.**
 
Even the SIT closure report dated 8.2.2012 holds that
The closure report is forced to concede that the actions of Tandon and Gondia were questionable. However, in its view, a simple departmental inquiry was all that was called for. Going back on its own earlier findings, the SIT now also exonerates Tandon and Gondia for being in close telephonic contact with two accused persons: Dr Mayaben Kodnani and Shri Jaideep Patel (p. 496, Closure Report, dated 8.2.2012).
 “The conduct of Tandon and Gondia was unprofessional and unbecoming of senior police officers.” However, “the basic requirements for prosecution under the above Section (304A) are that the acts (including omission) must be rash or negligent… Considering all the circumstances, evidence on record and the defence available with the suspect police officers (Tandon and Gondia), it may not be possible to prosecute them for the offence under Section 304A as proposed by amicus curiae…” (pgs 499-503, Closure Report, 8.2.2012).
 
VI. SIT found evidence against Zadaphiya, MOS Home
The SIT has also found evidence against the then minister of state for home Gordhan Zadaphia (who was reporting directly to Modi) for his complicity in the riots. Another BJP minister Mayaben Kodnani has already been booked in the Naroda Patiya massacre. (Pages 168-169, SIT Report to the SC, 2010)

 
VII. Patently Partisan Investigations by Gujarat Police Top Cops to Shield Ministers and VHP men and Women
The SIT accepted the allegation that the state police had carried out patently shoddy investigations in the Naroda Patiya and Gulberg Society massacre cases. It deliberately overlooked the cell phone records of Sangh Parivar members and BJP leaders involved in the riots — prominent among them were the Gujarat VHP president Jaideep Patel and BJP minister Maya Kodnani. “If these records had been analysed and used as evidence, it could have established their complicity.” (SIT report to SC, May 2010, Pages 101-105)
 
VIII. Modi Rewarded the Officers who Acted Illegally and Punished those who Acted Lawfully
Upright officers penalised
The 2010 SIT to the SC report affirms that police officers who took a neutral stand during the riots and prevented massacres were transferred by the Gujarat government to insignificant postings. SIT’s Chairman Raghavan has termed these transfers “questionable” since “they came immediately after incidents in which the officers concerned were known to have antagonised ruling party men”. (Pages 7-8 of chairman’s comments in SIT Report to SC, May 2010)
The upright officers who were penalised for performing their constitutional duty include IPS officers Rahul Sharma, Vivek Srivastava, Himanshu Bhatt and Satishchandra Verma.
“It is true that there were a few such transfers which were in fact questionable, especially because they came immediately after incidents in which the officers concerned had known to have antagonised ruling party men… Neither police officer would however admit he had been victimised (pgs 32-36, Report to SC dated May 2010, and p. 8, Chairman’s Comments to SC, May 2010).

Guilty cops rewarded
The SIT report dated May 2010 to the SC admits the allegation that police officers who allowed riots to fester were rewarded with lucrative postings.

• MK Tandon, who was the joint commissioner of police of Sector II, Ahmedabad, in 2002 and in whose jurisdiction more than 200 Muslims were butchered to death, was given the important post of inspector-general (IG), Surat range, soon after the riots. In July 2005 he was appointed to the post of ADGP (law and order) at the state police headquarters, a position with statewide jurisdiction. Tandon retired from the same position.
• PB Gondia, deputy to Tandon, was DCP, Zone IV, at the time. He was promoted to the powerful post of IGP, State CID, and now enjoys the post of joint director, civil defence.
• In addition to these police officers, there were other controversial bureaucrats and policemen who have remained high in the favour of the government despite their black track records. Among them are G. Subbarao (then chief secretary); Ashok Narayan (then ACS, home); PK Mishra (then PS to Modi); PC Pande (then CP, Ahmedabad city); Deepak Swaroop (then IGP, Vadodara range); K. Nityanandam (then secretary, home); Rakesh Asthana (then IG and currently CP, Surat city) and DG Vanzara (now in jail for staging encounter killings).

 
IX. Partisan prosecutors appointed.  The SIT 2010 Report to the SC confirms that the government appointed VHP and RSS-affiliated advocates as public prosecutors in sensitive riot cases. The report states: “It appears that the political affiliation of the advocates did weigh with the government for the appointment of public prosecutors.” (Page 77 of the SIT report to the SC, May 2010) The SIT chairman (RK Raghavan) further comments that “it has been found that a few of the past appointees were in fact politically connected, either to the ruling party or organisations sympathetic to it.” (Page 10 of chairman’s comments to SIT report to SC, May 2010)) ##
“It appears that the political affiliation of the advocates did weigh with the government for the appointment of public prosecutors” (p. 77, SIT Report to the SC, May 2010). The allegation is partly substantiated” (p. 238, SIT Report to SC May 2010). Also, “It has been found that a few of the past appointees were in fact politically connected, either to the ruling party or organisations sympathetic to it” (p. 10, Chairman’s Comments, SIT report, May 2010). Details of the partisan appointments are at Page 157 of the SIT Report to the SC and annexed here in Annexure 3.
 
X. Gujarat Government Misled the Chief Election Commission. The SIT Report of 2010 to the SC also asserts that in August 2002, in a bid to ensure an early Assembly election, top officials of the Modi government misled the Central Election Commission by presenting a picture of normalcy when the state was still simmering with communal tension. (Page 79 to 86, SIT Report to SC, May 2010).  (The BJP had prematurely dissolved the Assembly on 19 August 2002, nine months before the expiry of the five-year term, and demanded an early election. The BJP clearly wanted to take electoral advantage of the communal polarisation.)
 
SIT Reports on Gujarat 2002 are available at cjp.org.in
 

1. SIT Preliminary Report, 12.5.2010 (in SLP 1088/2008, Zakia Jafri & CJP versus State of Gujarat) 
2. Chairman RK Raghavan’s Comments to May 2010 report  
3. Closure Report dated 8.2.2012

and below

1. Interim Report of Shri Raju Ramachandran dated 20.1.2011 (pdf)
2. Final Report dated 25.07.2011 (pdf) 

 
3. SIT Closure Report dated 8.2.2012
Volume I
(PAGES     1-100      101-200      201-270)

VOLUME II  
(PAGES     271-370   371-458    459-541)

ZAKIA JAFRI Protest Petition
Protest Petition PART (I)
Protest Petition PART (II)

The post Propaganda Behind the Clean Chit to Modi appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Image: PTI
 
The news that the Narendra Modi government has picked former CBI chief R.K. Raghavan, who led a probe that cleared then chief minister Modi of complicity in the 2002 Gujarat riots, as high commissioner to Cyprus in its first political appointment to India’s diplomatic establishment passed without much media comment barring a few news portals. Noisy television anchors simply ignored the story.

The Telegraph commented that, unlike its predecessors, the Modi government had so far avoided political appointments to ambassadorial positions, earning the Prime Minister much goodwill within the Indian Foreign Service. With Raghavan, it has decided to make a departure.

R K Raghavan was heading the apex-court appointed Special Investigation Team (SIT) to investigate the 2002 Gujarat riots cases. He was appointed on March 26, 2008. In April 2017, it was senior advocate Harish Salve, amicus curaiae who put forward Raghavan’s case requesting that he, Raghavan be relieved from the duty of heading the SIT. Now, over four months later he has a plum positing as Ambassador.
 

On April 13, the Supreme Court allowed R K Raghavan, who was heading the apex-court appointed Special Investigation Team (SIT) to investigate the 2002 Gujarat riots cases, to be relieved as the head of the team. A bench comprising Chief Justice J S Khehar and Justices D Y Chandrachud and S K Kaul considered the submission of senior advocate Harish Salve, who is assisting the court as an amicus curiae, that Raghavan be relieved from the duty of heading the SIT.  The apex court has been monitoring nine sensitive cases after the National Human Rights Commission and various NGOs termed the investigation into these shoddy and unreliable. The cases were about the riots in different parts of Gujarat, including the Gulberg Society, Ode, Sardarpura, Narodao Gaon, Naroda Patya, Machipith, Tarsali, Pandarwada and Raghavapura.  An estimated 2,000 people were killed in the post-Godhra reprisal killings in 2002.

The Supreme Court Order erads, “ Learned Amicus Curiae has made a request on behalf of Shri R.K. Raghavan, the Chairman of the Special Investigation Team (SIT), seeking to withdraw from the SIT hereinafter, on account of his ill health. We appreciate the request made, and release him from his responsibility as the Chairman of the SIT.” (Chief Jutsice Kehar, Justices DY. Chandrachud and Sanjay Kisan Kaul)

The SIT under Raghavan had run into its fair share of controversy when survivors had alleged that the investigations were not robust enough, and that documentary evidence and phone call evidences had been studiously ignored. In 2009, survivors had pressed for a re-constitution of the SIT. After a fractitious hearing two Gujarat based officials, Shivanand Jha and Geeta Johri had been ordered by the Supreme Court of India to stay away from the  SIT investigations.

Raghavan had himself been a subject of a probe, about ten years prior to the Gujarat 2020 carnage. This was allegedly serious security lapses surrounding the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi. Despite his indictment, Raghavan got away lightly and was rehabilitated by the Vajpayee government, being made director CBI. “There had been a feeling of disbelief,” Outlook magazine wrote a decade before that, in 1999, when the National Democratic Alliance government of the time, led by Atal Behari Vajpayee, appointed Raghavan as the 19th CBI chief, as he had been “charged by the Verma Commission with failing to control access to Rajiv Gandhi, then denied promotion, refused empanelment for selection to any Central government post, and further rebuffed by not being awarded the President’s Police Medal”.

Raghavan has been a regular contributor to Frontline and The Hindu. During his stint as chairperson, SIT he was also accused of currying and obtaining favours from the Modi regime. He had denied this charge but the issue of a clear conflict of interest remains. All officers of the SIT are paid from the Gujarat government exchequers, and as far as the Zakia Jafri case is concerned, senior counsel from the Supreme Court of India appear for the SIT –that is vociferously defending it’s clean chit to ‘politicians, policemen and administrators’—on hefty legal fees paid by the taxpayers of Gujarat.

In 2009-2010, survivors backed by CJP had approached the Supreme Court of India pointing out the sheer lacunae in SIT’s investigations as also the failure of the SIT to stop Gujarat officers, tainted by the earlier inquiry into the probe.

In May 2010, the preliminary inquiry report by the SIT under Raghavan had found many of Zakia Jafri’s allegations levelled in her 119-page complaint to be true. However, in its closure report dated February 8, 2012, there appeared to be a turnaround and the SIT said that there was not enough material to go ahead with a prosecution.

Excerpts from the 2010 SIT report:

1.   The report says, “In spite of the fact that ghastly and violent attacks had taken place on Muslims at Gulberg Society and elsewhere, the reaction of the government was not the type that would have been expected by anyone. The chief minister had tried to water down the seriousness of the situation at Gulberg Society, Naroda Patiya and other places by saying that every action has an equal and opposite reaction.” (Page 69 of the report)

SIT Chairman RK Raghavan further comments that Modi’s statement “accusing some elements in Godhra and the neighbourhood as possessing a criminal tendency was sweeping and offensive coming as it did from a chief minister, that too at a critical time when Hindu-Muslim tempers were running high.” (Page 13 of SIT chairman’s comments)

The inquiry officer also notes: “His (Modi) implied justification of the killings of innocent members of the minority community read together with an absence of a strong condemnation of the violence that followed Godhra suggest a partisan stance at a critical juncture when the state had been badly disturbed by communal violence.” (Page 153)

2.   The report says, in an extremely “controversial” move, the government of Gujarat had placed two senior ministers — Ashok Bhatt and IK Jadeja — in the Ahmedabad city police control room and the state police control room during the riots. The SIT chairman comments that the two ministers were positioned in the control rooms with “no definite charter”, fuelling the speculation that they “had been placed to interfere in police work and give wrongful decisions to the field officers”. “The fact that he (Modi) was the cabinet minister for Home would heighten the suspicion that this decision had his blessings.” (Page 12 of chairman’s comments)

(It is to be noted that Ashok Bhatt’s cell phone analysis showed that he was in touch with VHP leader Jaideep Patel, a key conspirator of the Naroda Gaon and Naroda Patiya massacre, and with Gordhan Zadaphia, the then minister of state for home and who is now seen by the SIT as a major culprit of the Ahmedabad massacres.)

3.   The report affirms that police officers who took a neutral stand during the riots and prevented massacres were transferred by the Gujarat government to insignificant postings. SIT’s Raghavan has termed these transfers “questionable” since “they came immediately after incidents in which the officers concerned were known to have antagonised ruling party men”. (Pages 7-8 of chairman’s comments)

4.   The report says “The Gujarat government has reportedly destroyed the police wireless communication of the period pertaining to the riots.” It adds, “No records, documentations or minutes of the crucial law and order meetings held by the government during the riots had been kept.” (Page 13)
(This is a shocking finding. Why were these official records destroyed? What was there to hide? It has to be remembered that the Gujarat government had constituted the Justice KG Shah Commission (which was later reconstituted as a two-member commission headed by Justice GT Nanavati with KG Shah as its member) on 6 March 2002, one month after the riots, to inquire into the circumstances around the riots and was thus dutybound to preserve police control room records and other documents and minutes of meetings as they could have been vital evidence of the partisan role played by the State machinery.)

5. The report says Modi displayed a “discriminatory attitude by not visiting the riot-affected areas in Ahmedabad where a large number of Muslims were killed, though he went to Godhra on the same day, travelling almost 300 km on a single day.” (Page 67) The SIT chairman also comments that “Modi did not cite any specific reasons why he did not visit the affected areas in Ahmedabad city as promptly as he did in the case of the Godhra train carnage.” (Page 8 of chairman’s comments)

6. The SIT confirms that the government appointed VHP and RSS-affiliated advocates as public prosecutors in sensitive riot cases. The report states: “It appears that the political affiliation of the advocates did weigh with the government for the appointment of public prosecutors.” (Page 77) The SIT chairman further comments that “it has been found that a few of the past appointees were in fact politically connected, either to the ruling party or organisations sympathetic to it.” (Page 10 of chairman’s comments)

7. According to the report, the Gujarat government did not take any steps to stop the illegal bandh called by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad on 28 February 2002. On the contrary the BJP had supported the bandh. (Page 69)
(It is important to remember that it was Hindu mobs mobilised by the local VHP and BJP leaders in the name of bandhs that had carried out the horrific massacres at Naroda and Gulberg Society on 28 February 2002.)

8. The SIT report also says that, in an inexplicable move, the police administration did not impose curfew in Naroda until 12 pm and Meghani Nagar (Ahmedabad city) until 2 pm on 28 February 2002. By then, the situation had severely deteriorated at both places.

9. According to the SIT, despite detailed reports recommending strict action submitted to Modi by field officers of the State Intelligence Bureau, the Modi government failed to take action against a section of the print media that was publishing communally- inciting reports, inflaming base emotions. This had vitiated the communal situation further. (Page 79)

10. The SIT also asserts that in August 2002, in a bid to ensure an early Assembly election, top officials of the Modi government misled the Central Election Commission by presenting a picture of normalcy when the state was still simmering with communal tension. (Page 79 to 86)
(The BJP had prematurely dissolved the Assembly on 19 August 2002, nine months before the expiry of the five-year term, and demanded an early election. The BJP clearly wanted to take electoral advantage of the communal polarisation.)

11.The SIT discovered that the state police had carried out patently shoddy investigations in the Naroda Patiya and Gulberg Society massacre cases. It deliberately overlooked the cell phone records of Sangh Parivar members and BJP leaders involved in the riots — prominent among them were the Gujarat VHP president Jaideep Patel and BJP minister Maya Kodnani. If these records had been analysed and used as evidence, it could have established their complicity. (Pages 101-105)

12. Many senior police are now being investigated by the SIT for their suspected complicity in the riots. The former Ahmedabad joint commissioner of police MK Tandon, in whose area around 200 Muslims were killed, has been found guilty of deliberate dereliction of duty. (Post the riots, however, far from being censored, he got one lucrative posting after another and retired as additional director general of police in June 2007.) His junior, former deputy commissioner of police PK Gondia, has also been found guilty of willfully allowing the massacres. The SIT says that if the two had just carried out their duty hundreds of Muslims could have been saved. (Pages 48-50) Neither of these officers was held accountable by the Modi government.

13. The SIT has also found evidence against the then minister of state for home Gordhan Zadaphia (who was reporting directly to Modi) for his complicity in the riots. Another BJP minister Mayaben Kodnani has already been booked in the Naroda Patiya massacre. (Pages 168-169)

The post RK Raghavan Bowed Out of SIT for ‘Health Reasons’, But Fit Enough to be Ambassador? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Najeeb, who has been missing since the night of October 15, had had an altercation with the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP) students on the premises of the university hostel during which he was allegedly beaten up by the ABVP mob. He had last spoken with his mother, who reached campus the very next day only to find him missing. Witnesses have also said that he was assaulted by students owing affiliation to the ABVP who reportedly also abused him during the attack.
 
While an SIT has been constituted for the investigation and help has been sought from the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), Najeeb’s family reportedly said at a press conference on Thursday (October 27) that they have no faith in JNU administration or Delhi Police. Jawharlal Nehru University Students’ Union (JNUSU) has been protesting along with Najeeb’s family on the university premises, demanding action against the ABVP students involved in the brawl.
 
Satarupa Chakraborty, general secretary, JNUSU told SabrangIndia, “Even after 15 days, they haven’t been able find any trace of Najeeb, and still the police have not arrested or even interrogated those who had attacked Najeeb the night before he went missing. They’re roaming around freely on the campus, as if they don’t have anything to do with this incident. This is really bothering us.”
 
She further claimed, “We were told by the home ministry that we’ll be briefed about the search operations on a daily basis and will be kept aware of the details of the investigation, which they have not followed. We don’t trust the police, since no action has been taken against the perpetrators and no information is being shared with us.”
 
Slamming the university administration for its apathy towards the missing student Chakraborty said, “They’ve given out several statements expressing concern over Najeeb, but haven’t said a word about the brawl that was the reason behind all of this. What is the meaning of this? We cannot trust the university administration either.” 
 
She also informed SabrangIndia that the Student’s Union is in the process of seeking legal opinion as their next step, if Najeeb is not to be found in the next couple of days. “We’ll continue to protest. We will not give up. So far we have approached different concerned authorities, from the ministry of home affairs to the national minority commission. Now, we plan to meet the President of India with a representative, mass signature campaign. It is shocking that this degree of apathy is shown by a central university in the capital” she said. 
 

The post A Fortnight Down, where is Najeeb? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Where were the Top Cops when Armed Mobs Surrounded and Attacked Gulberg Society?

Analysis with Chart
 
Commissioner of Police PC Pande
​
Curfew was declared in the Meghaninagar area where the Gulberg Society is located at 12.54 pm (according to the Police Control Room Records—PCR). By then, according to data of the PCR itself, the Gulberg Society had already been surrounded by a mob of 4-5,000 armed with weapons.
(12.38 p.m., PCR Records). In law, the Commissioner of Police, PC Pande has the responsibility of declaring curfew on time.
 
At 2.09 p.m. PI Meghaninagar KG Erda even asked for Central Forces but the PCR records show no deployment of paramilitary forces in the area till late in the evening, a decision that should have been taken by the Commissioner of Police, PC Pande.

 
Joint Commissioner of Police, Sector II, MK Tandon
 
He finds himself more comfortable in the Revdi Bazar area between 2 and 3 p.m. immediately after he received a call from his boss, Commissioner of Police PC Pande informing him of the attack on the residents of the Gulberg Society in the Meghaninagar area. (Revdi Bazar is five kilometres away from the Gulberg Society)
 
When the PCR sent a message to Tandon mentioning that Shri Ahsan Jafri and other residents of the Gulberg society were in danger, Tandon was still seen in Revdi Bazar area which was apparently calm, with no incidents of violence.
 
In spite of Meghaninagar PI KG Erda desperately seeking additional deployment at Gulberg around 2.30 p.m. MK Tandon leaves the Revdi Bazar area only after he was ordered to do so by City Police Commissioner, PC Pande around 3 p.m. Ironically, Revdi Bazar where Tandon appears to have sought asylum falls under the jurisdiction of his counterpart Shivanand Jha who during those crucial minutes was in the comfort of his own office at Shahibaug.

Click on the Chart for Zoom
 

DCP Zone IV, P.B. Gondia
 
Not only did Tandon shy away from the engulfed and burning Gulberg society, even his deputy,
DCP Zone IV, PB Gondia inspite of being repeatedly informed by PCR (Police Control Room) about the attack on Gulberg Society stayed away from the worst affected areas and from attending
to the helpless cries of residents. He preferred to stay at the Kuber Nagar area, 6 kilometres away.
 
Gondia arrives at the Gulberg Society a few minutes before 2 p.m. on that fateful day only to leave the place in less than one hour, leaving a free way of passage to the armed mob. Later that afternoon Gondia moves to the Kalupur area which does not come under his jurisdiction.
 
The safety of the entire Meganinagar area during the most crucial periods of the day, from 11.30 a.m.-3.30 p.m. was left on PI KG Erda’s shoulders despite the fact that Erda had himself asked the PCR to inform his bosses about the gravity of the situation and also to ensure that senior officers remain physically present as things were beyond his control. Today, KG Erda is an accused in the trial but P.B.Gondia, M.K. Tandon and P.C. Pande have escaped the investigator’s net.
 
Clearly evident is the fact that the top Gujarat officers turned a deaf ear and a blind eye to the pleas of victims under attack for reasonsbest known to them. The entire Meghaninagar area was left unmanned by senior police personnel even when a residential society along with a neighbouring police chowkey were set afire leading to huge casualties. Among the 70 persons maimed, massacred and burnt to ashes, were former parliamentarian Shri Ahsan Jafri.

KG Erda

 
(Source: Phone Call Records Analysis Co-Related with PCR Records,Citizens for Justice and Peace)

The post How Gujarat’s Top Cops Deserted Residents of Gulberg Society appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Today, June 17 is the day that final judgement will be delivered in the Gulberg Society Massacre. Witness Survivors have filed detailed Written Arguments making a strong case for life sentence. The advocates for the survivors, backed by Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) have also ,ade out a strong case for Compensation under Section 357 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. After June 2, when Judge PB Desai first declared that a total of 24 persons have been convicted and that the charge of conspiracy not accepted, there were three further dates when detailed arguments, largely on behalf of the accused (for reduction of sentence) took place. SM Vohra with Salim Shaikh argued strongly for a strong life term for all accused and also submitted written arguments.

Charred remains of a home at Gulberg Society, Ahmedabad; Photo Credit: Ram Rehman

The verdict of the Trial Court in the Gulberg Society case is due tomorrow, June 2.

The experience for standing up for the survivor eye-witnesses of the Gulberg massacre between 2009 and 2016 has been a unique experience. The experience tells me that without a strong and committed legal aid team, as we could provide, it is impossible for those who have been rendered homeless and hopeless to fight back, for justice and ensure that the guilty are punished.
 
This was possible due to the fact that we ensured good legal aid throughout the process, the Supreme Court of India ensured protection to the witness. Finally salaams and salutes to the witness- survivors themselves who saw the struggle for justice as paramount to any other concern.
 
Since 1985, I have been fighting such cases. But with this case I saw that witness-survivors rendered homeless and helpless after an attack such as the one in Gujarat 2002 was cannot negotiate the system without a strong and committed legal aid team. That we could provide.
 
Today, we anxiously await the verdict and hope that justice will be done.
 
Initially, I recall that there were issues when we felt that the judge showed no empathy. A woman, Sairabehn Sandhi who has seen her only son killed in front of her eyes was lightly dealt with, almost humiliated, her grief mocked. This behaviour caused much pain. But thereafter, we have fought hard and hope to get a good judgement tomorrow.
 
Our team of lawyers backed by the Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) team in Ahmedabad and Mumbai stood strong and ensured that at every stage we could take up matters with the with the Supreme Court appointed Special Investigation Team (SIT) and the apex court itself. This made it possible for there to be substantive justice in the other Supreme Court monitored cases handed.
 
Mental and legal support was provided by us. The rest of the courage and tenacity was shown by witness survivors. Our salaams to them.
 
It was also saddening to see the hostility of the SIT to us given the fact that it is witnesses and CJP that had in the first instance ensured a transfer of investigation to the SIT (2008). Do people register that though Gulberg society was in the heart of Ahmedabad the fire brigade did not once go to Gulberg to put out the fires that gutted the entire society? Not even as late as four or five days after the incident took place there? Why?
 
I have been in practice since 1985 and it is for the first time that we can see that in a real sense justice has been done in other trials. Hence we are hopeful in this one also. But for the determination that CJP showed in its continued support despite all adversity, we would not have reached here.
 
(Sabrang India: CJP’s legal team in the Gulberg Society case was led by senior advocate SM Vohra and supported by lawyers Salim Shaikh and Sadiq Shaikh).
 
 

The post Salaams and Salutes to the Witness-Survivors of Gulberg Society as We Wait for Justice: Advocate SM Vohra appeared first on SabrangIndia.