Mass Graves at Lunawada
Burying the
truth
As matters relating to the 2002 anti-Muslim pogrom in Gujarat
reach a critical juncture, Modi’s government tries to frame Teesta
Setalvad in the Pandharwada massacre and other carnage cases in a bid
to save its own skin
F or
over six months now the Gujarat state administration and the police
machinery under Chief Minister Narendra Modi have been running a
malicious and motivated campaign against Teesta Setalvad (secretary,
Citizens for Justice and Peace, and co-editor, Communalism Combat),
against lawyers engaged by CJP and against other human rights
activists fighting for justice for the victims and survivors of the
genocidal killings in Gujarat in 2002.
The objective is clear: to derail the ongoing
justice process in the Supreme Court – where Modi’s own fate hangs in
the balance – and the fast track courts in Gujarat – where nearly 350
accused, including many senior leaders of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP),
the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and the Bajrang Dal, face the prospect
of conviction and long years in prison. If the objective is clear, the
method too is apparent: malign and discredit activists and lawyers
fighting for justice, embroil them in cooked up charges and constrain
their personal liberties through illegal arrests.
The attack on Teesta Setalvad in particular has
been three-pronged: a widespread and malicious disinformation campaign
against her, slapping false charges on her and the threat of impending
arrest, all aimed at distracting her, as secretary of CJP, from the
relentless pursuit of justice since 2002. In making her the main
target the aim is also to intimidate and frighten hundreds of
eyewitnesses in the major carnage cases being tried in eight fast
track courts as directed by the Supreme Court of India.
The timing of these attacks is significant. The
three-judge bench of the apex court hearing the Zakiya Jaffri/ CJP
petition is clearly dissatisfied with the fact that though the Special
Investigation Team (SIT) report had seriously indicted Modi and his
lieutenants for their role in the 2002 Gujarat genocide, it claimed
there was not enough evidence to register criminal offences,
charge-sheet the chief minister and other perpetrators and haul them
into court. On May 5, the Supreme Court issued orders asking amicus
curiae Raju Ramachandran to carry out an independent scrutiny and
report back to the court before July 28.
That the court was unhappy with the functioning of
the SIT, its own creation, was evident from news reports on the court
proceedings the next day. ‘SC snubs SIT, calls in amicus’ read the
headline on page one of The Indian Express while the
opening paragraph of the report read: “In an unprecedented stance
since the Supreme Court started monitoring the Gujarat riots cases,
the apex court on Thursday [May 5] sidestepped its own Special
Investigation Team (SIT) to directly ask amicus curiae Raju
Ramachandran to ‘independently’ consider whether there is evidence
against Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi and others in the Gulberg
Society massacre case.”
‘Go beyond SIT report on Jaffri case, court tells
amicus curiae’ was the headline in The Hindu while the report
said: “The Supreme Court on Thursday empowered the amicus curiae in
the Zakiya Jaffri case to go beyond the report submitted by the
Special Investigation Team (SIT) [on the complaint of Ms Jaffri,
alleging that the Gujarat chief minister, Narendra Modi, and 61 others
had orchestrated the 2002 riots]… A three-judge bench of Justices DK
Jain, P. Sathasivam and Aftab Alam asked the amicus, Raju Ramachandran,
to analyse and examine the SIT’s report and give his comments in the
light of the statements of the witnesses filed along with the report.
The bench, in its order, said: ‘If the amicus curiae, on the basis of
evidence on record, finds that any offence is made out against any
person, he shall mention the same in the report… The copies of the
report, along with the comments of the [SIT] chairman, [shall] be
given to the amicus curiae who shall analyse them in the light of
evidence, statements of witnesses, and have his independent assessment
of the entire evidence which has come on record’.” The amicus curiae
was also given full authority to speak to any person if he thought it
necessary to do so.
All this can hardly be good news for Modi. At the
heart of the sustained and malicious campaign is the cynical and
calculated intention of the Gujarat state to derail the course of
justice being monitored by the apex court and ensure the acquittal of
the accused, which includes Modi himself, senior politicians and
functionaries of the BJP, VHP and Bajrang Dal as well as top police
officers and civil servants.
It may be recalled that the appointment of the SIT
by the apex court was the result of a complaint and tireless legal
battle waged by Zakiya Ahsan Jaffri and Setalvad of CJP before the
Supreme Court. It is no surprise then that a government that has acted
vindictively and maliciously against serving and retired IPS and IAS
officers who have stood by the Indian Constitution is training its
guns on activist Setalvad.
The charges levelled in the criminal complaint
against Modi and others are very serious indeed. Despite all the
efforts of the Gujarat government and its political mentors and allies
to subvert the course of public justice, preliminary investigations by
the SIT have revealed details of high-level involvement, of the chief
minister and his chosen others, in a series of criminal and
unconstitutional actions that engineered the massacre of 2,500 Muslims
in the wake of the Godhra incident. No less serious are the SIT’s
findings on the subsequent manipulation of evidence, subversion of
witnesses and so on.
The allegations against Modi and the government of
Gujarat – issuing criminal instructions to police officers and the
illegal stationing of ministers in the state and city police control
rooms thereafter – are substantiated by the macabre violence,
killings, rapes and burnings unleashed on minorities in 19 districts
of the state. These allegations and the current investigation are
unprecedented in the history of independent India. The illegal handing
over of the bodies of victims of the Godhra mass arson to a
functionary of a rabid right-wing outfit – the VHP – not to an
official of the administration or the police, and the inflammatory
media coverage of the Godhra incident by leading Gujarati newspapers,
further points to how premeditated the conspiracy actually was. The
VHP leader who was given charge of the dead bodies in Godhra on
February 27, 2002 is among those accused of instigating mass murder in
Naroda Gaon the next day.
On March 15, 2011 the Supreme Court had pulled up
the SIT, saying that the evidence it had gathered did not match its
inferences. On March 21, 22, 23 and 25, the SIT was compelled to
record the statement of yet another serving IPS officer, Sanjiv Bhatt,
who, according to reports in the media, has deposed that he was
present at a meeting held at the chief minister’s residence on the
evening of February 27, 2002 when the latter clearly directed police
officers to allow Hindus to “vent their anger” against Muslims.
Finally, on May 5, 2011 the apex court directed the amicus curiae to
arrive at an independent assessment, without consulting the SIT, of
whether or not a criminal offence can be made out.
The other equally relevant point is that the
patently false allegations against Setalvad of tutoring witnesses are
being orchestrated at a time when crucial trials are nearing
completion in the fast track courts in Gujarat. What is at stake is
the conviction of over 350 accused in the eight major trials (Gulberg,
Sardarpura, Odh – two separate trials, Naroda Patiya, Naroda Gaon,
Deepda Darwaza and the British national case) that are underway, some
of them nearing completion. Included among the accused in the ongoing
trials are top politicians, leaders of the BJP, VHP and Bajrang Dal,
senior police officers and civil servants. Despite the threat of
intimidation and repression, eyewitnesses and survivors have deposed
without fear in Gujarat courts, facing a hostile police and court
atmosphere but standing by the affidavits they had filed, through CJP,
in the Supreme Court of India.
It is these developments in the Supreme Court and
the fast track trial courts in Gujarat that explain the frantic
efforts of the Gujarat government under Modi to somehow detract from
the incriminating evidence piling up against the perpetrators. This is
sought to be achieved by somehow implicating on false charges the
person who has been at the forefront of the struggle for justice in
Gujarat: Teesta Setalvad. And in this desperate gamble the
perpetrators have found a willing ally in the Ahmedabad-based Rais
Khan, a former employee of CJP who was asked to leave the organisation
in January 2008 after financial irregularities were suspected and
survivor witnesses supported by CJP complained against his
questionable conduct.
Ironically, the baseless allegations being levelled
today are similar in substance to the tactics previously adopted by an
unrepentant Gujarat government against Setalvad and other human rights
activists since the genocidal carnage of 2002. Absent is any concern
for the lives lost or any shame in the continuing subversion or
perversion of the justice process. While the individuals making the
accusations have changed, the charges have remained the same. Since
September 2010, the principal agent for dissemination of this
malicious propaganda has been Rais Khan. And the accusations made by
him, more than two years after he was asked to leave CJP, have been
widely publicised by The Pioneer, edited by Chandan Mitra, a
BJP MP, and other mouthpieces of the sangh parivar.
Here in brief are the four alleged offences in
which Setalvad is sought to be falsely implicated:
Ř Rais Khan has accused Setalvad of hacking his
email account.
Ř
Rais Khan has accused Setalvad
of tutoring witnesses in the Naroda Gaon case, one of the eight major
carnage cases being tried in a fast track court in Gujarat.
Ř At the instance of Rais Khan, Setalvad was first
named in the FIR (first information report) and, more recently,
charged by the Gujarat police as an “absconding accused” in the
Pandharwada mass graves case.
Ř Five years ago a Mumbai fast track court
delivered its judgement in the Best Bakery case wherein most of the
accused – earlier acquitted by a lower court in Vadodara whose ruling
was upheld by the Gujarat high court – were found guilty and given
severe punishments. Now, more than 60 months later, Yasmin Shaikh,
sister-in-law of Zahira Shaikh, has claimed before the Bombay high
court that she was forced by Setalvad to lie before the Mumbai trial
court. It may be recalled that following accusations against her by
Zahira Shaikh in 2004, Setalvad had herself approached the Supreme
Court urging a full inquiry into the charges whereupon a team headed
by the registrar of the apex court was appointed by the court to
investigate the charges. The investigation concluded that the charges
against Setalvad were totally baseless and false. Zahira Shaikh served
a one-year prison sentence for lying in the court during the retrial
proceedings in Mumbai. Now, by filing an affidavit before the Bombay
high court and making accusations against Setalvad, Yasmin Shaikh is
by implication also pointing fingers at Judge Abhay Thipsay in whose
court the retrial of the Best Bakery case was conducted.
But the most serious allegation against Setalvad to
date has to do with her being falsely implicated in the Pandharwada
mass graves case. This is a five-year-old case that was recently
pulled out of cold storage when suddenly, and inexplicably, Setalvad
was not only named in an FIR but also charged as an “absconding
accused”. The Lunawada police summoned her to be present at the police
station on May 31 and her arrest appeared to be the obvious motive.
Setalvad moved the Gujarat high court in the matter and on May 27 the
court ruled that naming her as an absconding accused was “illegal and
mala fide”. The police were however permitted to make corrections and
prepare a fresh charge sheet in the case. Setalvad now proposes to
appeal to the Supreme Court, hoping to quash the FIR itself.
The facts of the Pandharwada case, as detailed in
the petition filed by Setalvad in the Gujarat high court on May 17,
2011, are a telling account of the blatantly communal, shameful and
inhumane character of the Gujarat police and state administration:
Ř March 1, 2002: The Khanpur police station records
the commission of the crime (the massacre of over 40 persons in two
separate incidents at Pandharwada in Panchmahal district).
Ř March 2, 2002: Some of the injured eyewitnesses
are shifted to the Cottage Hospital, Lunawada, in a government van.
All those who were killed, including the kin of the injured
eyewitnesses, are brought to the Cottage Hospital, Lunawada, as well.
Post-mortem reports on the dead are also prepared on the same day and
they are subsequently buried on the ground that nobody had come
forward to claim the bodies and therefore the dead bodies were not
handed over to their kin.
No panchnama (written and attested record)
of this ‘burial’ is prepared. Moreover, despite the fact that there
were three graveyards in Lunawada, the dead bodies are ‘buried’ in
forest land near the Paanam river on the outskirts of the town. The
bodies of the victims of both offences – CR No. I-11/2002 and CR No.
I-13/2002 – were buried separately in the same area.
Ř March 3, 2002: A local newspaper, Gujarat
Today, reports that four persons, including Jakir Deshot, were
killed by rioters on March 1 and that their bodies had been buried in
the nearby jungle. The report also states that the guardians of these
four persons had pleaded with the district collector to hand them the
bodies but their requests went unheeded. (Ultimately, after the DNA
from Jakir Deshot’s remains was found to match that of his kin, his
remains were handed over to his parents and then buried according to
religious custom on August 27, 2010.)
Ř October 8, 2002: In response to an application by
close relatives, the bodies of eight of those killed are handed over
to them.
Ř October 29, 2002: The two separate incidents of
killing are tried in a sessions court and all of the accused in both
incidents are acquitted.
Ř September 22, 2004: An application for further
investigation into the case is granted by the police.
Ř February 1, 2005: Some of the relatives of those
killed file affidavits with the police asking that the dead bodies of
their kin be handed over to them. This clearly shows that 11 months
before the dead bodies had been dug up, the victim survivors had
placed on record that the bodies had yet to be handed over to them by
the police.
Ř December 27, 2005: On receiving information from
victims’ relatives, Rais Khan goes to Lunawada where it was found that
several dead bodies were buried after the commission of the offence on
March 1, 2002. A ‘Janva Jog’ entry is registered by the police and the
statements of Rais Khan and Gulam Gani are recorded.
Ř December 27, 2005: The additional director
general of police, Gujarat, writes to the inspector-general of police,
Vadodara range, and the superintendent of police, Dahod, asking them
to keep the aggrieved parties informed of the recovery and attachment
of bones and skeletons, etc in order to ensure the impartiality and
credibility of the police.
Ř December 28, 2005: A writ petition is filed in
the Gujarat high court by a relative of a victim, and CJP, asking for
transfer of investigations to the Central Bureau of Investigation.
Ř December 29, 2005: The Gujarat high court directs
the CBI to collect the human remains that have been recovered and send
them to a laboratory in Hyderabad for DNA analysis. The court also
orders relatives of the deceased to cooperate in the DNA testing
process by giving blood, etc.
Ř January 2, 2006: With a view to preventing them
from cooperating with the CBI in giving blood samples, etc for the DNA
tests, the Lunawada police register an FIR against the relatives of
the deceased, charging them with illegal digging of the bodies. The
time at which the FIR was filed, 1:30 a.m., indicates that it was
filed with deliberate intent to pre-empt the efforts of victim
survivors in getting justice. It is only after assurances are given by
the CBI officers that the relatives provide blood samples for DNA
matching; the local police were asked not to arrest the accused named
in the FIR.
Ř April 18, 2006: After the accused were arrested
and released on regular bail as was required under the conditions of
the anticipatory bail order, the police applied for remand of the
victim survivors and because the victim survivors could not be present
on the required date, the local court issues non-bailable warrants
against them.
Ř December 8, 2006: The Gujarat high court orders a
stay on proceedings in the case in response to a petition filed by the
victim survivors.
Ř August 27, 2010: The remains of eight persons,
whose DNA was found to match that of their relatives, are handed over
to their kin.
Ř
November 24, 2010: The accused victim survivors who are the
petitioners in the matter, Special Criminal Application No. 408/2006,
withdraw the petition, as it had become infructuous without
adjudication on the merits.
Ř
December 14, 2010: Rais Khan and other co-accused surrender themselves
to the police and make a statement under Section 164 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure (CrPC). The timing of this incident is significant,
as this happens around the time Rais Khan is making allegations
against Setalvad with regard to the Naroda Gaon and Sardarpura matters
and receiving wide coverage from a section of the media led by The
Pioneer.
Ř
December 21, 2010: Rais Khan and the co-accused are granted regular
bail by the magistrate, Lunawada. Khan makes public his desire to see
Setalvad arrested. This reveals the impunity that he enjoys within
Gujarat.
Ř
February 15, 2011: Setalvad is granted anticipatory bail by the
additional sessions judge, Panchmahal.
Ř
March 18, 2011: The investigating officer issues summons under Section
160 of the CrPC, asking Setalvad to be present at the Lunawada police
station on March 25. Setalvad replies, requesting the investigating
officer to consider the provision of Section 160 of the CrPC which
specifies that being a woman, her statement as a witness was required
to be recorded at her residence, in Mumbai. Mysteriously, the
investigating officer is suddenly transferred.
Ř
April 3, 2011: In the same charge sheet filed against all the accused
who were earlier arrested and then released on bail, strangely,
Setalvad is mentioned as an “absconder”.
Ř
April 28, 2011: Setalvad again receives summons from the investigating
officer asking her to be present at the Lunawada police station. She
replies.
Ř
May 9, 2011: Setalvad receives another summons asking her to be
present at the police station on May 31, with no correction having
been made in the charge sheet.
It was this attitude of the Lunawada police that
forced Setalvad to file a petition in the Gujarat high court. The
petition pointed out that as a human rights activist, she and her
organisation had every right to provide legal aid to the poor victim
survivors of Pandharwada. Pointing to the devious intent of the
police, she underlined that they had initially opposed her application
for anticipatory bail which was however granted by the additional
sessions judge, Panchmahal. The police then issued a witness summons
to her and in less than two weeks’ time she was inexplicably turned
from a “witness” into an “absconding accused”. From all this it was
evident that the police were engaging in blatant abuse of the law in a
brazen attempt to illegally detain or arrest her.
As already mentioned above, through its order of
May 27, the Gujarat high court quashed the charge sheet that had named
Setalvad as an “absconding accused”. Setalvad is now planning to move
the Supreme Court, seeking to quash the FIR itself.
The state has persistently maintained that the mass
burial was not an illegal dumping. It further claims that it had
followed proper procedure in carrying out the mass burial in forest
land by the Paanam river. But the panchnama of the original
crime does not list the skeletal remains. So legally speaking, this
disproves the version proffered by the Gujarat state and its police.
Victim survivors and rights activists have pointed out that Lunawada
has a large kabristan (graveyard) spread over more than 100
acres of land. Hence, even assuming that the Gujarat police could not
trace relatives, why did they need to so callously dump the victims’
remains in riverside land instead of giving them a dignified burial in
the kabristan? Why dump them in an obscure spot outside
Lunawada town rather than handing them over to community leaders for a
dignified burial?
The worst aspect of the belated attempt to falsely
implicate Setalvad is that it hides the inhumanity that compounds the
criminality of the Gujarat police. Having waited for years, relatives
of the deceased – thanks to their own efforts and the order of the
Gujarat high court – were at last able to establish the identity of
their dead relatives in 2005-2006.
But it was only after a Supreme Court order in
February 2008 and a subsequent order of the trial court in December
2008 that a proper burial was finally conducted in August 2010 i.e.
eight years after the brutal massacre.
Given the seriousness of the charges against the
Gujarat state and its functionaries, these brazen attempts at
intimidation and threat need to be seen for what they are. There is no
guarantee that more false cases will not be cooked up by a vindictive
state government in the coming days and weeks. After Tehelka
scooped the SIT report indicting Modi (‘Here’s the smoking gun.
So how come the SIT is looking the other way?’, February 12, 2011),
IPS officer Rahul Sharma was served with a show-cause notice for
placing crucial telephone records before the Nanavati-Shah Commission
and the SIT. Clearly, the Gujarat government is worried that offences
could be registered against its chief functionaries for not only
aiding a massacre in 2002 but thereafter destroying evidence and
subverting the course of justice by doing all they can to intimidate
victim survivors and human rights groups who have stood by them.
The malicious campaign against Setalvad was initially launched in
May 2009 by the Gujarat government’s counsel in the Supreme Court.
Now, in Rais Khan, they have found a convenient ally. As stated at the
beginning of this report, the objective of this campaign is plain and
simple: to derail the trials, subvert the course of justice and thus
escape conviction.
|
|