Thaindian News

New Delhi, April 22 (IANS) Excerpts from the affidavit filed by senior Gujarat police officer Sanjiv Bhatt in the Supreme Court implicating Chief Minister Narendra Modi in the 2002 “communal carnage” following the Godhra train burning that killed 59 Hindus.

What Modi said at a crucial meeting Feb 27, 2002 after the train burning: “The chief minister Shri. Narendra Modi said that the bandh call had already been given and the party (BJP) had decided to support the same, as incidents like the burning of Kar-Sevaks at Godhra could not be tolerated. He further impressed upon the gathering that for too long the Gujarat Police had been following the principle of balancing the actions against Hindus and Muslims while dealing with the communal riots in Gujarat. This time the situation warranted that the Muslims be taught a lesson to ensure that such incidents do not recur ever again. The Chief Minister Shri. Narendra Modi expressed the view that the emotions were running very high amongst the Hindus and it was imperative that they be allowed to vent out their anger.”

Bhatt’s observations on the Special Investigation Team (SIT): “..I believe it is my painful duty to bring to the notice of this Hon’ble Court that the SIT does not appear to be living up to the enormous trust reposed in it by the Supreme Court of India, to conduct an impartial and thorough probe into the allegations of a larger conspiracy and administrative complicity behind the Gujarat riots of 2002 and hence the present affidavit.”

“The leakage of details regarding my earlier deposition and interaction with SIT have eventually found their way to the media and have further jeopardized my safety and the safety and security of my family members.

“SIT has chosen to intimidate certain witnesses and coerce them in to refraining from stating the true facts and thereby has created an impression that the SIT is becoming a party to the ongoing cover-up operation in Gujarat.”

“I have stated before the SIT that many serious incidents of communal violence, including the carnage at Gulberg Society, could have been easily prevented by firm and determined action on part of the Police.

“Even today, the situation in Gujarat is such, that witnesses would be afraid of vindictive reprisals and persecution at the hand of the State machinery. Evidently, witnesses serving under the control of State government would be highly reluctant to come forward and take a stand that could imperil their own safety or the safety and security of their families. I therefore request that this Hon’ble Court be pleased to ensure that the SIT follows up on all the leads provided by me in such manner that even reluctant witnesses feel safe and confident to state the truth.”

In 2002, Bhatt was based in Gandhinagar as deputy commissioner of intelligence in the State Intelligence Bureau. He is now posted as principal of the State Reserve Police Centre in Junagadh.

Bhatt said that there was continuous leakage of testimonies and information from SIT to the Gujarat government, which he had mentioned to the investigation group.

“It may kindly be noted that my fears regarding the confidentiality of my deposition before SIT were eventually confirmed as the contents of my signed deposition as well as the details of my interaction with Shri A.K. Malhotra and Shri Paramveer Singh-Members SIT, were somehow available to the highest echelons of the Government of Gujarat. As a result and consequence of the said breach of confidentiality, I was visited and continue to be visited with unpleasant consequences,” the affidavit said.

The 1988 batch IPS officer said the SIT was not interested in following up on his information on the Feb 27, 2002 meeting, citing technical rules. “I have time and again tried to bring these facts to the notice of the Special Investigation Team but they seem to be disinclined to follow-up these important leads in the course of the enquiry/investigation being carried out by them,” said Bhatt.

He further said that there was “unconcealed hostility” from SIT members, when he tried to bring up the “issue of a larger conspiracy or official orchestration behind the Gujarat Riots of 2002, as also the ongoing attempts at cover-up”.

“This was even more obvious when I gave names of witnesses who could corroborate the fact of my having attended the said meeting with the Chief Minister on 27.2.2002,” he said.