Factual inaccuracies in CPDR report
I
would like to point out that I have been misquoted on a number of points and
there are a number of factual mistakes in the CPDR report on the riots in
Ahmedabad in July 1999, extracts of which have been published by Communalism
Combat in its November 1999 issue.
Ø In para 1 of the report on page 12 I am quoted as
having said, “Members of the rally shouted anti-Muslim slogans while passing
through the Muslim dominated areas”. This is factually incorrect. The rally
passed through the Asarwa assembly constituency segments. As there were no
Muslim dominated areas on the road, there is no question of members of the rally
shouting anti-Muslim slogans during Shri L.K. Advani’s visit. What I had
mentioned was the incident which had occurred near Astodia Gate, Manek Chowk and
Gheekanta area during the week preceding Rathyatra when rallies were taken out
which resulted in law and order problems following provocative slogans. However,
this incident had no connection with Shri L.K. Advani’s visit to Meghaninagar.
Shri Advani’s visit was meant for a different context.
ØThe date of the Id–e–Milad
procession mentioned in para 3 of the report is wrong. Also the report wrongly
quotes me as having said that the procession was stoned. I only said that
Muslims had a tableau depicting Kargil war and heroism displayed by Indian
soldiers. By this I meant that even Muslims were as patriotic and nationalist on
this issue and they went to the extent of displaying the same spirit as many
Hindus did.
Ø Para 4
says, “the BJP took full advantage of such an atmosphere and opened its office
in the area and has stepped up its activities”. The Rathyatra did have communal
overtones and also flags of certain fundamentalist organisations were displayed.
But to say that an office was opened in the background of Rathyatra is factually
incorrect.
Ø The
statement about spreading rumours during the communal riots is also far from
what I had submitted before the CPDR committee. Rumour does not come out from
any particular community. The same was true this time also. Certain people of
both the communities were trying to spread rumours. Only a part of this came to
the notice of the police and which the police verified.
Ø In the last paragraph, I
have been quoted as saying that “there was not even an iota of evidence to
support this contention (ISI’s presence in Ahmedabad). This is also loosely
drafted. What I submitted before the committee was that there is no evidence to
prove the involvement of the ISI in starting the present communal riots. My
statement about the involvement of ISI was only in the context of the present
communal riots and not beyond this. There have been activities of ISI in the
past and at present also they have activities in Ahmedabad which has been proved
by evidence.
My
intention was to say that while Hindu mobs were led by leaders belonging to
fundamentalist organisations, Muslims had no leaders or organisations supporting
the Muslim criminals committing the riots.
Lastly, my name has been incorrectly spelt in the CPDR
report as DCP Vinod Mull, instead of Vinod Mall. Also, I am holding charge of
deputy commissioner of police, zone-IV and not of Shahibaug police station.
Shahibaug Police station is the place where my office is located.
In addition to the above,
there are many other factual mistakes.
Ø It has been mentioned that Rathyatra route is 30 kms
long and starts from Saraspur. This is incorrect. The route is about 17 kms long
and starts from Jagannath temple near Jamalpur.
Ø On Page 3 the report also mentions that the Muslim
women made efforts to push back the youth who were standing near the barricade
so that there was no provocation from either side. This is incorrect. There were
no Muslim women standing on the Rathyatra route, as there was a self–imposed
“curfew” by the Muslims in the communally sensitive areas.
It is also not true that only
Muslims wanted to prevent the communal trouble. People of both the communities,
i.e., Hindus and Muslims were equally eager to prevent communal trouble which
was evident from the fact that the Rathyatra passed off peacefully and members
of both the communities congratulated each other.
Lastly I congratulate you for publishing the CPDR
report.
Vinod Mall (DCP
Zone–IV, Ahmedabad City Ahmedabad)
|