Who sparked off fire in Godhra, was there a foreign angle ?
New Delhi
Anything related to Godhra and post-Godhra mayhem in Gujarat makes headlines.
Two so called 'crusaders' Teesta Setalvad and former cop R B Sreekumar are now under custody of Ahmedabad ATS.
Now that the Supreme Court has finally given a clean chit to Prime Minister Narendra Modi upholding the magisterial court's orders, many suggest it may be time to probe in detail whether the Godhra train inferno was preplanned. Whether there was any Pakistan angle?
When Narendra Modi used to scream 'Mia Musharraf', did he mean 'the unknown Indian voters' or the Pakistani elements? When Akshardham temple at Gandhinagar on Sept 24, 2002 was attacked by two young terrorists from across the border, the then Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee had said - 'yeh aag Kisne lagai". His reference was seen as a veiled attack on Pakistan only.
Prime Minister Vajpayee, who cut short his foreign trip to visit the temple, echoed similar sentiments blaming Pakistan. "Yeh sochi samjhi sazish thi (This was a well thought out conspiracy)".
The BJP, the VHP and other Sangparivar elements have all along since 2002 alleged that the Godhra
railway platform mayhem of Feb 27, 2002, was 'preplanned' by Islamist forces.
One common refrain from Gujarat police and ministers from time to time - beginning 2002 - has been
that "such a huge mob could not have been collected or gathered unless there was a deliberate attempt
to incite violence".
Narendra Modi, then Chief Minister of Gujarat, perhaps had his own reasons to
suspect a conspiracy or a plot from across the border.
There would have been some elements keen to derail the Ayodhya movement of the Hindus and
the Sanghparuvar and to a large extent - all these were also seen as attempts to 'defame' the then
Vajpayee government.
Late Vajpayee during his visit to the relief camp had said - "Mein kaun sa chehre leke desh ke bahar
jauangoa (With what face can I know go abroad?)"
Even Vajpayee's Defence Minister, George Fernandes, used to say that the strategic ramifications of the
entire plot could not be underestimated or ignored.
In fact, at the fag end of riots on September 24, 2002, two Pakistani terrorists were involved
in the attack on Akshardham temple at Gandhinagar.
Not surprisingly, on Sept 25, 2002, the then Deputy Prime Minister L K Advani (in-charge of Home portfolio)
told reporters at Akshardham premses only that hitherto unheard off 'Tehrike-e-Kasas (outfit of revenge)' terrorists
chose to attack the Akshardham temple with the intention to hold a number of people hostage and then get their
demands fulfilled.
Indian 'secular parties' did not condemn or react to the railway station inferno on Feb 27,2002 till the anti-Muslim
violence was triggered off in Ahmedabad and other places on Feb 28, 2002.
In fact the Railway Police Force FIR lodged on Feb 27 (2002) itself was the 'first' authentic version available
about the incident. It had categorically said that provocative appeals made over loudspeakers from a nearby
Masjid had surcharged the atmosphere.
It also claimed - "miscreants from the minority community had planned to attack more coaches and the
passengers had closed all windows and doors and thus made themselves captive targets".
The RPF version maintained that the train was stopped for the 'second time' by removing the vacuum
pump. Three RPF personnel on duty - Karan Singh, Sri Mohan Yadav and Ambaresh Kumar - fired
four rounds from .303 rifles.
Ambaresh also alerted other colleagues and the inspector in charge J K George.
Inspector George and one of his colleagues Nawab Singh rushed to the spot while 'provocative
appeals; were being made from the local Masjid over a loudspeaker.
The RPF FIR charged over 1000 people with conspiracy and murder under various sections including
section 302 of IPC.
The RPF officials also sought reinforcement and about 40 personnel and four doctors had rushed
from Baroda.
Curiously, it was later given out by eyewitness accounts and local residents that Godhra township did not
have much educated people. It was also reported that the chief occupation of a 'vast number of youths'
in the township has been to rob train passengers, snatch chains and lift bags.
There were other interesting stories related to the incidents of Godhra railway platform.
One source had said then (in 2002) that there was heavy stone pelting on the burnt coach from
the southern side of the tracks as window panes on the other side had melted in the fire.
Closer investigations of the Forensic Laboratory had stated that the intensity of the heat in the charred
coash S-6 was four-five times more towards seat No. 72.
It was concluded that - "....standing in the passage of seat number 72, using a container with a wide opening,
about 60 litres of liquid had been poured and immediately a fire had been started in the bogie".
On various allegations and theories of 'larger conspiracy', the Supreme Court has finally hit the
nail.
It said that accepting the argument of a larger conspiracy behind the riots would raise the question whether the
Godhra train burning was also the “outcome of alleged larger criminal conspiracy”.
“Such a view would be preposterous,” the judgment said.
In the meantime, the episode encircling Teesta Setalvad is also exciting.
The social activist had been into controversies in more ways than one with regard to the 2002 Gujarat riots.
In 2004, November, an eye witness in the Best Bakery case of Vadodara, Zaheera Sheikh, had charged
her with pressurising her.
The Supreme Court has taken cognizance of Gujarat police
complaint in the Zakia Jafri case wherein Setalvad is charged with forgery, giving false evidence, conspiracy and
fabricating records.
The complaint by the Gujarat police also names Retd IPS Officer R B Sreekumar and imprisoned former DIG (Gujarat)
Sanjeev Bhatt. Sreekumar and Teesta have been arrested.
The Supreme Court has also said that - “As a matter of fact, all those involved in such abuse of process,
need to be in the dock and proceeded with in accordance with law".
So, law has caught up with these elements. At least this is what the verdict from the highest court of the land suggests.
ends
SC endorses Nanavati-Shah panel report: 'Ramsevaks haven't done anything'
New Delhi
Even as the debate continues on Godhra rail station inferno of 2002 and subsequent
riots, it is certain that the Supreme Court's latest orders in effect endorse the findings of Nanavati-Shah Commission report that "Ramsevaks had not done anything".
The Commission in its report tabled on Nov 18, 2014 had said that, "the Ramsevaks (Hindu pilgrims returning from Ayodhya) had not done anything and no incident had happened earlier which could have led to the incident that happened later at Godhra".
The Nanavati-Shah panel in its 2000-page content had also quoted eyewitnesses including retired
army personnel who had traveled in the ill-fated Sabarmati Express in 2002.
In fact, witness number 1015, Ramnaresh Gupta said - "the mob (at Godhra station) was carrying
weapons like swords and iron bars and were shouting 'Maro, Kapo, Badhane Jalavi Do (Burn them all)".
Another eyewitness No. 1013, Radheshyam Mishra, a retired military havaldar, had stated that the mob
pelting stones on the train were shouting - "Mar dalo, Kat dalo". He was himself hit by a stone.
The Commission had said - "In absence of any evidence whatsoever indicating any incident on
the way, the Commission has no hesitation in coming to the conclusion that the suggestion made by
Jamait-e-Ulemma Hind that a quarrel had taken place between Ramsevaks and Vendors
at the Ujjain railway station is without any basis".
It said the journey of the said train from "Ayodhya to Godhra was trouble free".
Now, it needs to be taken cognizance by media and other objective observers that
controversial cops RB Sreekumar and Sanjiv Bhatt claims that as the Chief Minister
Narendra Modi had made certain statements “to allow vent to the Hindu anger"
were also not true.
The apex court noted that the SIT had looked into these allegations and had dismissed them.
It stated that according to other officials present in that meeting, either Bhatt or Sreekumar
were not in attendance, and that this claim was a “figment of imagination”.
The Supreme Court also called Sreekumar a “disgruntled officer”.
In its order the Supreme Court has stated that there was "coalesced effort" of disgruntled officials from
Gujarat and others to make false sensational revelations, which the SIT exposed.
"Intriguingly, the present proceedings have been pursued for he last 16 years… to keep the pot boiling, obviously, for
ulterior design," said the three judge bench comprising Justices A.M. Khanwilkar, Dinesh Maheshwari and C.T. Ravikumar.
It is also worth mentioning that the Nanavati Commission in its interim report submitted in September 2008 had stated
that the fire on the train at Godhra station on Feb 27, 2002, was the result of a "pre-planned conspiracy
involving some individuals".
Now, the roles played by media and organisations and some more individuals like Jamait-e-Ulemma Hind could
also come under scanner.
A section of BJP leaders are likely to take up issues concerning a decision by the erstwhile UPA government when
Railway Minister Lalu Prasad in a much controversial manner had appointed a committee headed by
retired Supreme Court judge U C Banerjee in Sept 2004.
Justice Banerjee-panel in a much hurried manner and in a questionable stance had declared that the fire
in the Sabarmati Express compartment was "only an accident".
This report was challenged by a relative of a victim, Nilkanth Bhatia in the Gujarat High Court. The single judge
bench of Justice D N Patel termed the formation of the Banerjee itself as illegal.
As expected the Congress-led UPA which was supported by communists had appealed against the ruling.
But in July 2014 (by the time Narendra Modi govt. was in power), the NDA government withdrew the appeal before
the bench of Justices K S Jhaveri and A G Uraizee.
ends
No comments:
Post a Comment