Menu

Citizens for Justice and Peace

13aug13

08, May 2017



August

13, 2013
Press Release


Thirteenth Day of Arguments
in the Zakia Jafri Protest Petition

 

The
hate ridden speech made by A-1 Narendra Modi at Becharaji, Mehsana,
on 9.9.2002 to launch the Gaurav Yatra and his election campaign was
adjudged by field officers of the State Intelligence Bureau to be
aimed at causing deep rift and communal divides, correspondence
regarding which was sent by former ADGP-Intelligence RB Sreekumar to
the National Commission for Minorities (NCM) on 16.9.2002 for which
he was first transferred and then targeted and victimized. Despite
the fact that the NCM had, through a letter dated 10.9.2002,
requested a transcript of the speech, ACS Home Ashok Narayan (A-28)
in the Zakia Jafri Complaint) and then DGP Chakravarthi (A-25) had
instructed Sreekumar not to send the transcript to the statutory
body. A handwritten noting of this illegal instruction signed by
then DGP Chakravarthi is visible on this letter dated 13.9.2002 and
yet the SIT made bold to give all accused a clean chit. Sreekumar,
respecting the law and the Constitutional mandate had ignoring these
illegal directives sent a copy of the transcript to the NCM on
16.9.2002 for which he was severely victimized. He was first
transferred out, then denied legitimate promotion (for telling the
truth to the Nanavati Commission in August 2004) and finally charge
sheeted. He emerged victorious before the Central Administrative
Tribunal (CAT) in two separate judgements. 

Mihir
Desai arguing for the thirteenth day in support of the Zakia Jafri
Protest Petition supported by Citizens for Justice and Peace pointed
out the serious contradictions in two different SIT reports about
the content of the same speech. The virulently anti-Islam and
anti-Muslim speech made by Modi that falls foul of Section 153a,
153b and 505 of the Indian penal Code, said Desai before Judge
Ganatra, 11th Metropolitan MagistrateÂ’s Court, Ahmedabad
today, was found by one officer of the SIT (AK Malhotra to the
Supreme Court, 12.5.2010) to be communal but yet, with no further
investigation, the Final report of the SIT (Himanshu Shukla, Crime
Branch Ahmedabad, 8.2.2012) gives Modi a clean chit for such a
speech. “…..Then
what is paining them? Since, we (means BJP) are here, we brought
water in Sabarmati during the month of Shravan, when you are there,
you can bring it in the month of Ramdan (the holy month of Muslims).
When, we brought water in the month of Shravan, you feel bad. When
we spend money for the development of Becharaji also, you feel bad.
What brother, should we run relief camps? (referring to relief camps
for riot affected Muslims). Should I start children producing
centers there, i.e., relief camps? We want to achieve progress by
pursuing the policy of family planning with determination. We are 5
and our 25!!! (Amepanch, Amara panch, referring to Muslim polygamy).
On whose name such a development is pursued? CanÂ’t Gujarat implement
family planning? Whose inhibitions are coming in our way? Which
religious sect is coming in the way?…”

are some of the divisive and inflammatory comments made by A-1 Modi
in this speech (whole transcript attached). “If it is a communal
speech, a hate speech meant to generate ill feeling and hatred in
2010 then it attracts penal provisions of the law for which A-1 Modi
must be prosecuted; how can SIT suddenly in 2012 find him not guilty
without any further investigation, especially when field level
officers of the SIB have adjudged the speech to be criminal? 

The SIT
had clearly manifest a mindset where it has believed only those
powerful accused arraigned in the complaint alleged Desai ignoring
upright and independent witnesses, including senior officers of the
Gujarat government like Sreekumar. ‘Why do you believe a OP Mathur
over a RB Sreekumar ?” he demanded on the question of maintenance of
a Conscience Register (attached) that had recorded a series of utter
illegal instructions given to him that Sreekumar did not follow.
Sreekumar warned the state government through a letter dated
3.11.2004 that he was in the possession of tapes and transcripts
that exposed the coercive tactics being used against him even before
he was denied legitimate promotion to the post of DGP Gujarat. In a
thumping judgement in SreekumarÂ’s favour (September 2007), the
Central administrative tribunal (CAT) had quashed the 9-point charge
sheet against him said Desai but for the SIT Courts do not matter.
SIT was clearly holding a brief for the powerful guilty accused.
Among the nine points for which Sreekumar had been charge sheeted
included revealing facts before the Nanavati Commission. In a
detailed and well-reasoned judgement, the CAT, quoting Sardar Patel,
IndiaÂ’s first Home Minister and HM SeervaiÂ’s IndiaÂ’s Constitutional
expert, had held that senior officers were bound to the law and the
Constitution and should not be servile to the illegal dictates of a
sections of the government who give malafide orders. In effect the
CAT ratified completely the stance of RB Sreekumar while being ADGP-Intelligence
maintained a Conscience Register recording illegal instructions and
independently serving the interests of the Rule of Law and
Constitutional Governance. The SIT had ignored all these facts and
dismissed the valuable evidence provided by Sreekumar. Instead of
looking at the facts and contents of the IB Reports (dated
24.4.2002, May 2002, 15.6.2002, 20.8.2002 and 28.8.2002) the SIT had
spent reams on trying to adjudge whether such a register ought to
have been maintained. The Home department under A-1 Modi
conspicuously did not maintain any minutes of any meetings nor
record proceedings of meetings, possibly because of the dubious
instructions given therein, and when an upright officer maintains a
record SIT chastises him for it, Desai countered.

The
significance of the contemporaneous evidence provided by Sreekumar
stemmed from the fact that he exploded the myth that violence was
controlled within 72 hours, he stressed on the deliberate subversion
of the criminal justice system — illegal freedoms given to the BJP
and sangh parivar criminals; gave independent assessments of lives
lost in police firing and mob violence to the NHRC and CEC (the CEC
accepted SreekumarÂ’s version) and in fact dared to report the rank
communal speech made at Becharaji by A-1 Narendra Modi. For all this
he has been sought to be marginalized by the SIT, concluded Desai.
Soon after Gill was appointed as special advisor to the Gujarat
government by the Centre in early May 2002 (because violence did not
stop) Sreekumar had suggested that culpable and complicit officers
like CP Ahmedabad PC Pande and others should be transferred. Gill
had followed these suggestions and transfers did take place
thereafter Desai said. Yet SIT deliberately chose not to record
statements of officers of the CEC, KPS Gill nor esteemed former CJI
and officers of the NHRC. Why, Desai demanded.

Desai
for the umpteenth time clarified that the SIT was required to
investigate the criminal complaint dated 8.6.2006 made by Zakia
Jafri assisted by CJP to the police. When there was no registration
both petitioners had approached first the High Court and then the
Supreme Court (SLP 1088/2008). Arguments will now continue on August
22.

.Annexure

92-Shri Kuldeep Narayan Sharma-08-03-10.pdf  



Verbatim of Public Speech delivered by the CM, Shri Narendra Modi,
at Becharaji


92-Shri Kuldeep Narayan Sharma-08-03-10.pdf  

Secret
Diary-Bombshell

 


Teesta Setalvad, Secretary


Other Trustees:  

I.M. Kadri,               Nandan Maluste      

Cyrus Guzder        Javed Akhtar                       
Alyque Padamsee
Anil Dharker          Ghulam Peshimam  
        Rahul Bose                            
               

Javed Anand         Cedric
Prakash


 

Leave a Reply

Go to Top