Modinama-2: Steps Taken by Modi to Control Riots

This is one in a series of posts critically assessing Madhu Kishwar's articles under the name Modinama. The others in this series (work under progress) are --

1. Modinama-8: Action Reaction

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(This is work in progress. There are explosive leads in the petition which I hope to combine with other reports available)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actions Taken by Narendra Modi to Control the Riots following Godhra Train Massacre

On 27/02/2002:
CM reaches Godhra at about 4.30 p.m. and goes to inspect the rail bogies which had been set on fire and ....Madhu Kishwar
 --------------------------------------------------------

From the protest Petition -

The tragic train fire on the S-6 Coach of the Sabarmati Express took place at 7.55 a.m. and was over by 8.13 a.m. at Godhra on 27.2.2002. This information about the Godhra incident was conveyed by the district magistrate Godhra, Mrs. Jayanti Ravi to Mr. Ashok Narayan, ACS Home, at 9 am and at the same time chief minister Mr. Narendra Modi (A-1) and DGP Mr. K. Chakravarti (A-25) were also informed. Therefore, by about 9 a.m. of 27.2.2002 both Mr. Ashok Narayan (A-28) and Mr. K. Nityanandam (A-34), and Mr. Modi (A-1) had information about the said incident. In this information it has been conveyed that it was the provocative sloganeering and behavior of the karsevaks that had caused the mob to gather and start pelting stones at the train. Independently, through sources of the VHP other co-accused, Mr. Ashok Bhatt (A-2), Mr. Gordhan Zadaphiya (A-5) and Mr Jaideep Patel (A-21) were also informed of the incident.

At 10.30 a.m. a meeting had taken place at the residence of Accused No 1 at Gandhinagar. In the said meeting Gordhan Zadaphiya, (Accused No. 5), Ashok Narayan (Accused No. 28), K Chakravarti (Accused no 25) and PC Pande (Accused No. 29) and other Zadaphia of the chief minister‘s secretariat were present.

.Before this official meeting following the Godhra incident could take place, however, Accused No. 1 had in the first instance, already called Mr Jaideep Patel (Accused No. 21) from the mobile of his PA (09825037439). There was another call made by Accused No. 1 to Mr Jaideep Patel on his mobile at Mobile No.09825023887. Mr Jaideep Patel, who was at that time at Naroda, left that place for Godhra and reached Godhra around 1 p.m. The moment the Chief Minister‘s Office (CMO) and the Gujarat Home Department also headed by Accused No.1 received information of the Godhra incident at Gandhinagar, and this was obviously conveyed to Accused No. 1, he makes a telephone call using the mobile phone of his PA, AP Patel (09825037439) to his collaborator and chief executor of the conspiracy Accused No. 21 Mr Jaideep Patel (09825023887) first at 9:39:38 (77 seconds), then again at 9:41:39 (20 seconds). That is, within minutes of Accused No. 1 receiving official intimation of the Godhra tragedy, he (chief minister) gets in touch with none less than the Secretary of the Gujarat unit of the VHP, Mr Jaideep Patel

Call Type	Cell-No (Name	Duration Secs	Date-Time	Dialed / Received No – Name
Outgoing	9825037439 A P Patel (Accused No 1, Mr Modi)	77	27.2.2002 09:39:38	9825023887 Mr Jaideep Patel VHP General Secretary (Accused No 21)
Outgoing	9825037439 A P Patel (Accused No 1, Mr Modi)	20	27.2.2002 09:41:39	9825023887 Mr Jaideep Patel VHP General Secretary (Accused No 21)

  These phone calls in quick succession soon after he receives knowledge of the Godhra tragedy is significant and evidence of A-1 speaking and conferring with the VHP‘s front man, who in Naroda at the time of the call thereafter left for Godhra. There was, therefore, a direct contact between the Chief Minister‘s Office (CMO) and VHP even before Accused No. 1 Mr Modi met with his officials after receiving news of the Godhra incident, or attended the Vidhan Sabha, or left for Godhra clearly establishing that plans for the conspiracy for the orchestration of the post-Godhra violent reprisals was being carefully hatched.

Only after first speaking to his co-conspirators did the chief minister (Accused No. 1) call a meeting at his residence at about 1030 hrs at which meeting he discussed the matter with Mr. Gordhan Zadaphia (Accused No 5), the then Minister of State (MOS) for Home, Ashok Narayan, the then ACS, Home (Accused No 28), K. Chakravarti, the then DGP (Accused No 25), P.C. Pande, the then CP, Ahmedabad City (Accused No 29) and other Zadaphia of the CM‘s secretariat. Mr. Ashok Narayan stated to the SIT that until then no news had been received about the exact number of casualties and the information was being received piecemeal.

On instructions of A-1, Ashok Bhatt (A-2) also leaves Ahmedabad and reaches Godhra around 1 p.m. (Statements to the media officially released by A-21 Mr Jaideep Patel and A-19 KaushikMehta also an office bearer of the VHP also provoke and distort facts. This is done with the full knowledge of A-1.) Curfew was declared at about 10 a.m. in the Godhra town.

A-21 Mr Jaideep Patel has shown his criminal intent being part of the conspiracy hatched by A-1 Mr Modi and himself. A fax message recorded by the State Intelligence Bureau (SIB) (Annexure III, File XVIII-D-160 at 188 dated 27.2.2002 states that A- 21 Mr Jaideep Patel, A- 19 Kaushik Mehta, also senior functionary of the VHP and Dilip Trivedi another general secretary of the VHP had, in a joint statement issued by them declared that ―hundreds‖ of Ram sevaks had been attacked in a preplanned conspiratorial attack, that compartments set on fire and women molested. This message coming from Vadodara are proof that such misinformation and provocative sloganeering had begun and had been allowed at Godhra. The remarks in this message says that though no such incident as alleged has happened (molestation of women) and also says that such propaganda has been ―recklessly made‖. The SIT could have scrutinized such records to ascertain the build up to the conspiracy. This message also suggests that a written statement may have been issued by the VHP. Why has SIT not bothered to look into such material at all?

There is absolutely no discussion in the SIT report about what transpired between 9 a.m. to 10.30 p.m. and Accused No. 1‘s role therein. The crucial evidence related to the calls made by A-1 to fellow conspirators and co-accused during that time have been completely omitted/ignored.
                        * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Thereafter, A-1 visited the civil hospital accompanied by A-2 Mr.Ashok Bhatt and A-5 Mr. Gordhan Zadaphia. Thereafter there was a meeting at the Circuit House where the DM was also present. DM had stated before the Concerned Citizens Tribunal that, in the first instance the government desired to transport the dead bodies of the Godhra victims by the same train on to Ahmedabad. But, she had advised against it. Before the SIT, Mrs. Ravi has denied this completely. The train had left Godhra station by detaching the burnt bogeys by 1300 hours. Accused No 2 Ashok Bhatt and A-21 Mr Jaideep Patel were already in Godhra by then and therefore they must have communicated the CM‘s decision on this matter to the DM.

 SIT admits at Page 60 in its final report dated 8.2.2012 that Mrs Jayanti Ravi has stated that in the meeting held at the Collectorate, A-21 Mr Jaideep Patel, a VHP leader was also present. However, under Allegation No. IV, the SIT still goes on to assert that A-1 Mr.Modi had never met A-21, Mr. Jaideep Patel (SIT Report, 8.2.2012). The SIT has not dealt with this aspect that the postmortems of the dead bodies was taking place in the presence of A-1 and was not stopped by him though it was an illegal act. The SIT also does not deal with the presence of a large crowd of VHP workers and the presence of Mr Jaideep Patel general secretary of VHP Gujarat besides the presence of A-2 Mr Ashok Bhatt and A-5 Mr Zadaphiya. Worst of all, the SIT has not bothered to even look at the required legal procedures necessary to be observed in the wake of the Godhra tragedy. There are strict laws against allowing such hasty post-mortems to happen without proper procedures of identification and without family members being present; there is a strict prohibition against allowing photographs of corpses in a gory or mutilated condition from being taken, shot or telecast.  By not even dealing with this grave offence, the SIT has shown its unprofessionalism and distinct bias. SIT has deliberately left un-investigated the whole question of the illegal and hasty post-mortems conducted in the open in the rail yard, with large and aggressive crows of the VHP, RSS and BD present, despite the fact that these facts are made known to them in the statements of then DM Jayanti Ravi and others. SIT has not investigated how gory photographs were allowed to be taken, telecast and broadcast not just by newspapers like the Sandesh but also publications brought out by the VHP. SIT obviously did not consider investigating such serious facts as emerged in the Investigation that too in such a sensitive case

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There is a statement recorded of Mr. Shankar Menon, retired I.A.S.,on 11.5.2010 by IO, SIT, A.K. Malhotra that contains valuable bits of information that have not been investigated further by the SIT This can be read at Sr.no.179 Annexure I, Vol.I in theinvestigation paper. Mr. Menon who had volunteered his statement before the SIT states that he used to regularly write articles in the newspapers after his retirement, including in The Asian Age from 1999 till 2004 to 2005. He states that he used to write on matters related to public services and also related to bureaucracy. He states in his statement before Malhotra after the Godhra train burning incident of February 27, 2002, he hired a taxi from Bombay and visited Godhra around end of Mach 2002 or beginning of April 2002 to try and get a first-hand account of the whole episode for his weekly column. He states that he went straight to the office of the Collector and met Mrs. Jayanti Ravi. He states that as per his recollection he had fixed up an appointment with her through one of her relatives placed in Mumbai. He states that being of the same class and a junior colleague (IAS hierarchy) she was extensively forthcoming about the entire incident. Menon states that Mrs. Ravi told him in strictest confidence that the fire that led to the incident appears to have started from within the bogey. After the incident, the accused no.1 visited Godhra and the site of the incident and he had closeted himself in the Circuit House with his close political workers and colleagues. She says that though it was a confidential meeting from which she and other government officers were kept out, a recently transferred Dy. Collector who was not recognised by anyone locally found his way into the meeting. At this meeting, the Deputy Collector said he heard accused no.1 say that for every person killed in the train incident, his workers should avenge the death with at least 3 times the number of Muslims. According to the statement of Mr. Shankar Menon, Mrs. Ravi told him that this Dy. Collector who had observed the meeting closely heard the accused no.1 saying that the law and order force would be suitably kept away until the deaths of the killings have been avenged. Mr. Menon states that Mrs. Ravi did not disclose the name of the Dy. Collector, nor did he ask for the name. It appears clear that the agitation and discomfort felt by DM & Collector has been neutralised or mellowed over time.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------