Ahmedabad, 9 May 2012

Following paragraphs are from the Special Investigation Team (SIT) closure report on the subject of Zakif Jafri’s complain on illegal instructions at the 27-02-2002 meeting called by Chief Minister Narendra Modi:

As regards the meeting held on the night of 27-02-2002, in which allegedly illegal instructions were given by Chief Minister to the administrative and police officials, it has come to light that an emergency law & order review meeting to take stock of the situation was called by Chief Minister at his residence at about 22.30 hrs after his visit to Godhra. It has come in evidence that the meeting lasted for half, an hour or so and was attended by Smt. Swarna Kanta Varma. the then acting Chief Secretary. Shri Ashok Narayan. the then ACS (Home). Shri K Chakravarthi. the then DGP, Shri RC. Pancle the then CP. Ahmedabad City, Shri K Nityanandam, the then Secretary. Home Department. Dr. P.K. Mishra. the then Principal Secretary to CM. Shri Prakash Shah, the then Addl. Secretary. Law & Order and Shri Anil Mukim, Secretary to CM. None of the Cabinet Ministers or Shri G.C. Raiger. the then Add( ps (Int.) was present.

Since the presence of Shri Sanjiv Shatt the then DCI (Security) in the meeting on 27 02.2002. is not established, his statement cannot be relied upon. Shri Narendra Modi has also denied the presence of Shri Sanjiv Bhatt in the said high level meeting. His presence has been denied by others who were definitely present. Shri R.B. Sreekumar has claimed that Shri K. Chakravarthi had spoken to him on 28-02- 2002, about the said meeting and had claimed that CM uttered these words. However, Shri K Chakravadhi, the then DGP has categorically denied any such conversation with Shri R.B. Sreekumar and as such, it becomes hearsay evidence, which can not be considered as evidence for any action.

Shri R.S. Sreekumar, in his representation dated 03.08.2009, had mentioned the names of a different officer, who according to him, had attended this meeting. Significantly, name of Shri Sanjiv Bhatt had not been indicated by him. This goes to support that Shri Sanjiv Shalt was not present in the meeting. As regards the deposition of Late Haren Pandya; formerly MoS Revenue before the Concerned Citizens tribunal, in which he had claimed to have attended the meeting called by Chief Minister on the night of 27- 02-2002, all the participants have denied the presence of any of the Cabinet Ministers/MoS at the said meeting.

Late Haren Pandya was only a Minister of State for Revenue at that time. Shri Narendra Modi has stated that it was essentially a Law & Order situation review meeting and none of his Cabinet colleagues attended it. Besides this, there is documentary evidence In the form of call detail records of Late Haren Pandya, which conclusively prove that he was present at Ahmedabad till 22:52:07 hrs on 27-02-2002 and as such he could not have been present in the meeting convened by Chief Minister around 22.30 hrs or so. In view of this the testimony of late Heron Pandya before the Tribunal becomes highly unreliable. Also relevant here is the strained relationship between him and Shri Narendra Modi, a fact revealed by late Pandya’s father late Vithhalbhai Pandya.

Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, the then DCI (Security), has claimed to have attended the meeting, which is not established. Further, None of the senior administrative or police officers has stated that the CM uttered the following words. That “so far in communal riots police takes action on one to one basis and that this will not do now. Allow Hindus to give vent to their anger,” Shri Sanjiv Bhatt the then DCI (Security), had initially claimed off the record during his examination on 25/26-11-2009, that the CM had uttered these words at the said meeting. This fact was duly incorporated by Shri A.K. Malhotra, Member. SIT in his Inquiry Report dated 12.05.2010 submitted to the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India. However, during his further examination in CR No 67/02 of Meghaninagar PS no 21&22-03-2011, he improved his version and added that “This time the situation warranted that the Muslims be taught a lesson to ensure that such incidents do not recur ever again.” It was for the first time after a period of seven years and nine months that Shri Sanjiv Bhatt claimed to have attended the crucial meeting convened by the Chief Minister on 27.02.2002.

Shri Sanjiv Bhatt has explained that the then DGP Shri K. Chokravarthi had instructed him to attend the meeting with IB’s assessment of the situation. Shri K. Chakravarthi categorically denied to have given any such instructions and has further stated that Shri Sanjiv Bhatt was not present at the said meeting. Seven other officers who attended the meeting have also categorically stated that Shri Sanjiv Bhatt was not present in the said meeting. However, Smt Swarnakanta Varma stated that she was unable to recollect whether Shri Sanjiv Bhatt was present or not. Besides that Shri Sanjiv Bhatt has pleaded ignorance about the fact as to whether Chief Minister’s alleged instructions were passed on by the senior police officers to the subordinates and also as to whether the same were complied with or not. Shri Sanjiv Bhatt is a tainted witness and therefore, cannot be relied upon keeping in view his back ground in the police department as he was involved in criminal cases of serious nature and departmental inquiries are also in progress against him. It may be added here that even before this meeting, when Chief Minister visited Godhra on 27.02.2002 evening, he addressed the media at the Collectorate and asserted that the culprits would not be spared and the victims would be paid of Rs. 2 lakh each. The CM also appealed to the public through media to maintain peace.

Further more, on 28.02.2002, that is within less than 12 hours of the alleged meeting that took place on the night of 27.02.2002, the CM has stated on the floor of the Assembly, where the Opposition was also present, that “the State Govt. has ‘taken this heinous, inhuman and organized violent act very seriously and is committed to give exemplary punishment to the culprits so that such incident never recur anywhere” The Chief Minister repeated almost the similar facts in his press conference held on 28.02.2002 afternoon at Circuit House, Annexie, Ahmedabad. It would not be out of place to mention here that in his appeal made to the public through Door-darshan on 28.02.2002, Chief Minister reiterated that Gujarat will never tolerate any such incident and that guilty will be punished for their heinous crime. He also said that the culprits would be awarded such exemplary punishment so that no one would dare to involve himself in such an incident. This would go to show that at-least on five occasions, which are fully documented, during 27.02.2002 & 28 02 2002 Chief Mindaor addressed Media, Assembly and General public and every where the genesis and intention was one and the same, i.e., to punish the culprits responsible for the Godhra incident in an exemplary manner, so that such incidents did not recur ever again. In the light of aforesaid discussion, the interpretations made on alleged illegal instructions given by the Chief Minister, by Shri R B. Sreekumar and Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, appear to be without any basis. Further, even if such allegations are believed for the sake of argument, mere statement of alleged words in the four Walls of a room does not constitute any offense.

More from the report on 27th meeting and Sanjiv Bhatt

As regards the alleged utterances made by the Chief Minister in the meeting called on 27-2-2002 night at his residence, it may be mentioned here that Shri RB Sreekumar, the then Addl. DG (Int.) had claimed that Shri K Chakravarthi the then DGP had informed him on 28-2-2002 that the Chief Minister had said in the meeting that ‘Komi hullado ma tame police barabari karo cho. Tame be Hindu ne pakdo to tame be Musalmano ne pan pakdo chho. Have em nahic hale. Hinduono gusso utarva do.” (In communal riots police takes action against Hindus and Muslims on one to one basis. This will not do now – allow Hindus to give vent to their anger.) Shri Chakravarthi has denied that he held any such talk with Shri RB Sreekumar. Even otherwise, the version of Shri RB Sreekumar becomes hearsay.

However on the other hand Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, who insists that he was in the said meeting, has alleged that the Chief Minister had said “that for too long the Gujarat police had been following the principle of balancing the actions against the 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.”

Assuming for the time being that the Chief Minister did say so, there is a material difference between the two versions in as much as Shri Sanjiv Bhatt has tried to improve his version by way of addition. “that this time the situation warranted that the Muslims be taught a lesson to ensure that such incidents do not recur ever again.” Since there is no independent corroboration of the version of either Shri RB Sreekumar or Shri Sanjiv Bahtt, no reliance can be placed on either of them. It is relevant to mention here that the LD. Amicus Curiae has agreed with the findings of SIT that the aforesaid statement of Shri RB Sreekumar was not admissible in evidence.

Investigation further revealed that the headquarters of State Intelligence Bureau is located at Gandhinagar and is headed by an Addl. DG, assisted by IGP (Security), DIG (Political & Communal) and three Deputy Commissioners of Intelligence and other officers and supporting staff. Besides State la there are intelligence units headed by Inspectors/ DySP working independently in the Districts. The State IB has been entrusted with -the duties of collection of intelligence in respect of maintenance of law & order including communal intelligence in Gujarat State. In brief, the functions of the State IS relate to collection and collation of information regarding political, industrial and other similar developments in the State, verification of antecedents, protection and security of the VIP’s, watch over anti-national activities, In February, 2002, Shri G.C. Raiger was posted as Addl. DO (Int.) and was assisted by Shri 0.P. Mathur, IGP (Security & Admn.). In addition, there was another post of IGP (Political & Communal), which was lying vacant due to the death of Shri S.Kumar In January, 2002. There were three SP rank officers out of which, Shn Sanjiv Bhatt was posted as DCI (Security), Shri P.B. Upadhyay as DCI (Political and Communal) and the third post was DCI (Admn.) which was lying vacant. It has further come to light that Shri G.C. Raiger was on casual leave from 26-02-2002 to 28- 02-2002 and was away to Rajasthan, but returned on 27-02-2002 evening. Shri P.B. Upadyay, the then DCI (Communal) was on leave from 26-02-2002 onwards to arrange for sacred thread ceremony of his grand son fixed for 01-03-2002. However, Shri OP Mathur, IGP had called him up on 27-02-2002 afternoon, informed him about the Godhra incident and instructed to resume duties immediately. Accordingly, Shri Upadyay had resumed duties on 27-02-2002 evening. However, in his absence, his work was being looked after by Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, who was the only other SP rank officer in the State IB.

Shri GC Raiger has stated that on his return to Ahmedabad on 27-2-2002, he had come to know about the Godhra incident and had telephonically informed DGP Shri K.Chakravarthi on 27-2-2002 evening that he would cut short his leave and come to Gandhiangar, if necessary, to which the DGP asked him to join on 28-2-2002. Shri Raiger has denied having been informed by the DGP about the meeting called at CM’s residence on 27-2-2002 late in the night. Shri Raiger denied having received any information about the meeting from either the State IB Control Room, State Control Room or even Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, the then DCI(Security).Shri OP Mathur has also denied that he received any such information about a meeting called at CM’s residence on 27- 02-2002 night. Shri P.B. Upadhyay,. the then DCI (Communal), who had resumed the duties on 27-02-2002 evening, and used to look after Communal and Political section and was the concerned officer to be associated with the said meeting, had also no • information about the said meeting thereby suggesting that no one from the intelligence was required to attend the said meeting.

Shri K. Chakravarthi, the then DGP has stated that he had gone to studios of Door-Darshan, Ahmedabad City on 27-2-2002 late in the evening, for the telecast of an appeal to the general public to maintain communal harmony and peace, when he received a message from state control room that CM had called for a meeting at his residence at Gandhinagar around 2230 hours, Shri Chakravarthi has stated that he straight away went to CM’s residence at Gandhinagar and reached there a little earlier and waited as CM had not arrived from Godhra by that time. According to Shri Chakravarthi, Smt. Swarna Kanta Varma, the then acting CS, Shri Ashok Narayan, the then ACS(Home), Shri PC Pande, the then CP, Ahmedabad city and Shri K Nityanandam the then Secretary(Home) arrived only subsequently. Shri Chakravarthi has categorically denied having given any instructions to Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, the then DCI (Security) to attend the aforesaid meeting. He has further stated that Shri Sanjiv Bhatt did not accompany him to CM’s residence in his car from DG’s office, as he(DGP) did not visit office at that time. He has also stated that in case Shri Raiger was available at Ahmedabad, he would have given instructions to State control room to call him. According to Shri Chakravarthi even otherwise, Shri OP Mathur, the then IGP (Admn and Sec.) was available and could have been called to attend the meeting rather than asking Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, a junior officer of SP level to attend the said meeting.

Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, the then DCI(Security) has named two AIOs namely Shri KD Panth and Shri Shailesh Raval, who used to accompany him to such meetings along witht he files. After Shri Sanjiv Bhatt’s further statement was recorded at his own request on 25-03-2011, he insisted that Shri K.D. Panth, who was accompanying him and was waiting outside, should also be examined. He sressed that Shri Panth should be examined in his presence. However, Shri Bhatt was informed that Shri K.D. Panth would be called on a date convenient to the 10 and examined. Accordingly, Shri Panth was informed on 04-04-2011,, to attend SIT office on 05-04-2011, for his examination.

Shri K.D. Panth in his examination has stated that he was on casual leave on 27-02-2002. Further, he has denied that he followed Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, the then DCI (Security) to CM’s residence on 27-02-2002 night. However, he has stated that Shri Sanjiv Bhatt had called him to his residence on 24-03-2011 night and informed that he was going to make a statement before the SIT that he (K.D. Panth) had gone to attend a meeting at CM’s residence on 27-02-2002 night, and that he (Panth) had been called at State IB office and be ready with the files for the said meeting. Shri Sanjiv Bhatt further informed Shri Panth that he should accompany him to SIT office on 25-03-2011, arid make a statement on these lines.

During his examination, Shri Panth further stated that he has contacted Shri Sanjiv Bhatt over his landline telephone no. 27455117 from mobile no. 8140657775 (belonging to one of his friends) after he was called for examination scheduled for 05-04- 2011. Shri Sanjiv Bhatt called him at his residence on 04-04-2011 at 2030 hrs. At his residence, Shri Sanjiv Bhatt informed Shri Panth that he has made a statement to the SIT that he (Bhatt) had accompanied DGP Shri K. Chakravarthi in his official car to CM’s office from DGP’s office on 27-02-2002 night and that he (Shn Panth) had followed him in his (Shri Sanjiv Bhatt’s) staff car along with the files. Shri Sanjiv Bhatt asked Shri Panth to make a statement accordingly.

Subsequently, Shri K.D. Panth lodged a complaint against Shri Sanjiv Bhatt with the local police to the effect that Shri Sanjiv Bhatt had influenced, threatened, detained, put severe pressure and complelled him to sign an affidavit containing false/wrong and incorrect facts, in pursuance of which a case was registered with Ghatlodia police station, Ahmedabad city, Gujarat state. Shri Sanjiv Bhatt has since been arrested in this case.

Tarachand Yadav has stated that he recollects that, Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, the then DCI (Security) had gone to CM’s residence in a three star car with either DGP or some ADGP from Police Bhavan and that he had followed him in his staff car, in which Shri K.D. Panth, the then AI0, State 1B sat with some files. He has also stated that Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, the then DCI (Security) returned after about 25 minutes and he took him to Police Bhavan, where he worked till midnight i.e. 0030 hrs and then drove him back to his residence at Ahmedabad. Shri Yadav could not say as to whether Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, the then DCI (Security) accompanied DGP or some ADGP rank officer. He has denied knowledge, as to whether Shri Sanjiv Bhatt went inside CM’s office to attend the meeting or not, as he was waiting outside. He has also stated that on 28-02-2002, Shri Sanjiv Bhatt reached Police Bhavan at about 0900 hrs and worked in his office and did not go out to attend any meeting at CM’s house. On 28-02-2002, he has stated that he started from Gandhinagar dropped Shri Sanjiv Bhatt at his residence at about 1900 hrs However, he could not recollect the details of the various events of 1st, 2nd & 3rd March, 2002 due to passage of time.

The version of Shri Tarachand B Yadav is contradicted by Shri K.D.Panth, who has denied to have followed Shri Sanjiv Bhatt in his staff car driven by Shri Tarachand Yadav.

In addition, the version of Shri Tarachand Yadav about the movements of Shri Sanjiv Bhatt on 28-02-2002, are proved to be false in as much as Shri Sanjiv Bhatt did not come to Gandhinagar at 0900 hrs, as the call detail records of his official mobile phone show his location at Ahmedabad City tower till 1057 hrs. Shri Tarachand Yadav further contradicts the version of Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, who claims to have attended a meeting on 28-02-2002 at 1030 hrs, at CM’s residence. The overall impression left in the matter is that Shri Sanjiv Bhatt has introduced him as a false witness with a view to corroborate his own false version about having attended a meeting at CM’s residence on 27-02-2002 night, whereas in fact Shri Tarachand Yadav does not recollect anything about the events of 27-02-2002 onwards. Moreover, he is a motivated witness, who has got an axe to grind against the Govt. on account of his dismissal from service. In view of this no reliance can be placed upon his evidence.

During further investigation, PSOs of the then DGP Shri K. Chakravarthi were examined. PSI Dilip Jivaram Ahir and Head Constable Dharampal Jagaram Yadav stated that they had never seen Shri Sanjiv Bhatt sitting in the vehicle along with DGP.

Shri G.C. Raiger, the then Addl. DG (Int.) has stated that Shri Sanjiv Bhatt was never posted as Staff Officer to Addl. DG (Int.), because there is no post like, that in the State IB. Further, Shri Sanjiv Bhatt could not have been a Staff Officer to the DGP. as Late V.S. Shinde, Dy.SP was posted as Staff Officer to the DGP. Shri Raiger has further stated that Shri Sanjiv Bhatt used to accompany him in the meetings called by the Chief Minister sometime, but was normally made to wait outside with the relevant files/information and did not join the meetings. Shri Raiger was unable to recollect any meeting called by the Chief Minister, which Shri Sanjiv Bhatt attended along with him. Shri Raiger has further stated that on 28-02-2002, he did come to know about the meeting called by the Chief Minister at his residence on 27-02-2002, but Shri Sanjiv Bhatt did not inform him of having attended the said meeting and also about its agenda or the matters discussed in the said meeting.

Shri R B. Sreekumar formerly ADGP Intelligence, in his interview given to the Star Hindi News Channel at 12.35 hrs on 22.04.2011 has stated that Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, DCI (Security) had never informed him about having attended a meeting at CM’s residence on 27.02.2002. He has further stated that at the time of filing an aiffidavit before Nanavati Shah Inquiry Commission, he had asked all the officers of State IB to provide him with the relevant information and documents in respect of Godhra riots but Shri Sanjiv Bhatt did not give him any information about the said meeting. According to Shri Sreekumar, Shri Sanjiv Bhatt was handling security portfolio and communal portfolio was being looked after by another officer. Shri Sreekumar has also stated in the interview that it was a normal procedure that if a junior officer had attended a meeting on behalf of ‘senior, he was required to submit a report to his superior and that Shri G. C. Raigar, the then ADGP (Int) should be asked about it. As already stated above, Shri Raigar has denied having received any information/report from Shri Sanjiv Bhatt in this regard.

Further more from the report

Shri Sanjiv Bhatt has claimed that he mentioned the fact of having attended the said meeting on 27-02-2002 night in his movement diary. However, the State IB has reported that no such diary was being submitted by Shri Sanjiv Bhatt. Shri G.C.Raiger the then Addl. DG (Int.() has stated that there was no such system of submitting any monthly movement diary by DCI and that Shri Sanjiv Bhatt had never submitted any such diary.

Shri Sanjiv Bhatt have claimed to have briefed Shri G.C.Raiger, the then Addl. DG (int.) on 28-02-2002, at about 1000 hrs about the alleged meeting held by the Chief Minister and also about the illegal instructions given by the latter. This claim is absolutely false and is contradicted from the call detail records of the Govt. mobile phone no 9825049398 of Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, which show that the location of Shri Sanjiv Bhatt was at Memnagar, Ahmedabad till 10:57:43 hrs on 28-02-2002.

Further, Shri Sanjiv Bhatt has claimed that he did not submit any report about the meeting held by the Chief Minister at his residence on 27.02.2002 night, as he attended the meeting as a Staff Officet to DGP/Addl. DG(Int.). This contention put forward by Shri Sanjiv Bhatt is absurd because there was no post of Staff Officer to Addl DG (Int.) and Shri K.Chakravarthi has denied that Shri Sanjiv Bhatt was posted as Staff Officer to DGP, as the Staff Officer was of the rank of Dy.SP and not SP.

Shri Sanjiv Bhatt has contended that he did not file affidavit nor appeared as a witness before the SIT in response to a public notice issued by the SIT, as it would ot have been appropriate on his part to divulge any information that he was privy to as an intelligence officer unless he was under a legal oblication to do so. In this connection, it would not be out of place to mention here that assuming for the time being that Shri Sanjiv Bhatt attended the alleged meeting of 27.02.2002, the same was essentially a law and order meeting attended by the various officials of State Administration and therefore the question of oath of secrecy or application of the Officials Secret Act does not arise because it was neither a secret meeting nor would the revelation of the contents of the said meeting jeopardized the public interest.

Shri Sanjiv Bhatt has used the weapon of the Official Secrets Act only as a pretext with a view to justify a long delay of nine years and just because an official of the intelligence unit attended a law and order meeting,the same does not became a secret meeting for which a privilege of secrecy is being claimed by Shri Sanjiv Bhatt. In any case, Nanavati Commission and SIT have been set up under the provisions of law of the land and all the citizens/officials are legally bound to divulge the information available with them which are relevant to the terms of reference/crimes of the Commission being investigation by SIT. In view of this, the explanation put forward by Shri Sanjiv Bhatt does not hold good.

Another claim of Shri Sanjiv Bhatt that he left the meeting of 27-2-2002 night halfway is suggestive of the fact tat in reality he did not attend the meeting. This meeting was of a very short duration and it was practically impossible for a junior officer of the level of Shri Bhatt to leave the meeting midway.