Did the SIT give clean chit to Modi? The answer is a big NO, here is why

SIT has not given a clean chit to Modi.

In both reports, first filed in May 2010 before the Supreme Court (that includes Chairman RK Raghavan’s Comments separately) and the Closure report filed before the Magistrate on 8.2.2012, the SIT has held that while there is evidence and many of the allegations made in the Zakia Jafri Complaint dated 8.6.2006 are true and correct, in its own assessment, this evidence is not prosecutable. This is not a clean chit to Modi as is being propagated.

Besides Amicus Curaie Raju Ramachandran’s Report to the SC clearly stated that Modi should stand trial for offences under Section 153(a), 153(b) and166 of the Indian Penal Code.

Key Points of May 2010 SIT Report Contrasted with 2012 Closure Report

I. Callous and Communal Mindset of Modi (chief minister and state home minister since 2002)

  1. Modi’s Communal Mindset The SIT Report (May 2010) report says, “In spite of the fact that ghastly and violent attacks had taken place on Muslims at Gulberg Society and elsewhere, the reaction of the government was not the type that would have been expected by anyone. The chief minister had tried to water down the seriousness of the situation at Gulberg Society, Naroda Patiya and other places by saying that every action has an equal and opposite reaction.” (Page 69 of the SIT Report to the SC, May 2010)
  2. Modi’s Discriminatory Attitude. The 2010 SIT report to the SC says Modi displayed a “discriminatory attitude by not visiting the riot-affected areas in Ahmedabad where a large number of Muslims were killed, though he went to Godhra on the same day, travelling almost 300 km on a single day.” (Page 67) The SIT chairman also comments that “Modi did not cite any specific reasons why he did not visit the affected areas in Ahmedabad city as promptly as he did in the case of the Godhra train carnage.” (Page 8 of chairman’s comments, SIT report to SC May 2010)
  3. Sweeping and Offensive Statements by Modi. SIT Chairman RK Raghavan (May 2010 to the SC) further comments that Modi’s statement “accusing some elements in Godhra and the neighbourhood as possessing a criminal tendency was sweeping and offensive coming as it did from a chief minister, that too at a critical time when Hindu-Muslim tempers were running high.” (Page 13 of SIT chairman Raghavan’s comments, SIT report to SC May 2010)
  4. Modi Justified Killing of Innocents. The inquiry officer (AK Malhotra also notes: “His (Modi) implied justification of the killings of innocent members of the minority community read together with an absence of a strong condemnation of the violence that followed Godhra suggest a partisan stance at a critical juncture when the state had been badly disturbed by communal violence.” (Page 153 of the SIT Report to SC, dated May 2010)
  5. Modi’s Election Gaurav Yatra Speech at Behacharaji, Mehsana was controversial and definitely hinted at a growing minority population. The explanation given by Shri Modi is unconvincing and it definitely hinted at the growing minority population. (Page 160 SIT Report to SC, May 2010). Excerpts of Text of Speech at Annexure 1.  SIT Closure Report (2012): While the amicus finds the words spoken by the chief minister an offence, an incitement to violence and hatred against a particular section of the Indian people, in its closure report, the SIT finds that no criminal offence has been committed and recommends a closure of these allegations.
    On the ‘action-reaction’ statement: “As per Modi’s version, he had not and would never justify any action or reaction by a mob against innocents. He had denied all allegations in this regard.” Zee TV never sent a copy of the interview, says the SIT. Their correspondent Sudhir Chaudhary told the SIT the Editors’ Guild report contained only excerpts and he did not have the original CD. He did recollect Modi’s reply that a mob “had reacted on account of private firing done by Jaffri, the SIT says. Chaudhary told the SIT Modi was of the view that he wanted neither action nor reaction. Modi reportedly said: “Godhra mein parson hua… jiski pratikriya ho rahi hai” but Chaudhary could not recount the exact sequence” (pgs 482-483, SIT Closure Report). “As regards the public speech delivered at Becharaji, Mehsana district, on September 9, 2002, as a part of Gaurav Yatra, Modi has explained that the speech did not refer to any particular community or religion. According to Modi, this was a political speech in which he has pointed out the increasing population of India and had remarked that ‘can’t Gujarat implement family planning?’ Modi has claimed that his speech has been distorted by some interested elements who had misinterpreted the same to suit their designs. He has also stated that there were no riots or tension after his election speech. No criminality has come on record in respect of this aspect of allegation” (p. 272, SIT Closure Report).
  6. Modi Government Took No Steps to Stop Illegal Bandh. According to the SIT report of 2010 to the SC, the Gujarat government did not take any steps to stop the illegal bandh called by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad on 28 February 2002. On the contrary the BJP had supported the bandh. (Page 69, SIT Report to SC, May 2010)
    (It is important to remember that it was Hindu mobs mobilised by the local VHP and BJP leaders in the name of bandhs that had carried out the horrific massacres at Naroda and Gulberg Society on 28 February 2002 and those all over the state over the next days. March 1 was a state wise bandh when massacres at Randhikpur-Sanjeli, Sardarpura, Sesan, Odh, Pandharwada and Kidiad among others took place)
  7. Modi as Home Minister did not Act to prosecute Hate Speech. According to the SIT report of 2010 to the SC, despite detailed reports recommending strict action submitted to Modi by field officers of the State Intelligence Bureau, Modi as Home Minister failed to take action against a section of the print media that was publishing communally- inciting reports, inflaming base emotions. This had vitiated the communal situation further. (Page 79, SIT Report to SC, May 2010)
  8. Modi as Home Minister responsible for Destruction of Crucial Records. The 2010 SIT report to the SC says “The Gujarat government has reportedly destroyed the police wireless communication of the period pertaining to the riots.” It adds, “No records, documentations or minutes of the crucial law and order meetings held by the government during the riots had been kept.” (Page 13, SIT Report to SC, May 2010)

II. SIT Confirms the Serious Allegation that Godhra Dead Bodies were handed over to Jaideep Patel of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad in an illegal and controversial move. Jaideep Patel of the VHP was also allowed to attend an official meeting at the Collectorate, Godhra.

In the 2010 SIT Report to the SC, the SIT says, “SIT inquiry revealed that there was in fact a discussion at Godhra on the final disposal of bodies of those killed in the Godhra carnage. This was during chief minister Narendra Modi’s visit to the town on the afternoon of February 27, 2002. It was held at the collectorate. It is not clear who all were present or consulted. Apart from the district collector, the presence at least of Gordhan Zadaphiya (MoS, home) and Jaideep Patel, VHP activist, has been confirmed…..”… (pgs 19-23, SIT Report to the SC, May 2010; pgs 2-3, Chairman’s Comments, SIT report to SC May 2010).

SIT Closure Report 8.2.2012 also admits that Jaideep Patel transported the dead bodies to Ahmedabad

“The above facts would go to establish that though a letter had been addressed by mamlatdar, Godhra, to Patel of VHP….Nalvaya, mamlatdar, has acted in an irresponsible manner by issuing a letter in the name [of] Patel in token of having handed over the dead bodies which were case property and therefore the government of Gujarat is being requested to initiate departmental proceedings against him” (p. 463, Closure Report).

III. Narendra Modi did hold a meeting on 27 February 2002.

But Did he tell his officers to let Hindus vent their anger freely against Muslims? SIT claims there is no conclusive evidence but holds that no minutes of an Official law and Order Meeting (as is Standard Operational Procedure) were maintained.

In arriving at its conclusion that ‘there is no conclusive evidence’ of the criminal statement by Modi, the SIT has discarded the evidentiary statements of Justices PB Sawant, Hosbet Suresh, former MOS Revenue, GOG, Haren Pandya, Suresh Mehta, and Sanjiv Bhatt. It has accepted the evidence of those IAS and IPS officers who are co-accused in the Zakia Jafri Complaint dated 8.6.2006 that include former chief secretary Subha Rao, former ACS Home Ashok Narayan, former DGP, K Chakavarthi, former Principal Secretary, CMO, PK Mishra, former Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad, PC Pande.

SIT Report to SC in May 2010 “In the light of the above, a law and order meeting was in fact held by Modi at his residence late in the evening of February 27. However, the allegation that chief minister instructed the chief secretary, DGP and other senior officials to allow the Hindu community to give vent to their anger on the minority Muslims in the wake of Godhra incident is not established” (p. 19, SIT report to SC, May 2010).

IV. SIT Accepts that in a Controversial Move Ministers were stationed in the Ahmedabad City and State Control Rooms

The SIT Report to the SC, May 2010, says, in an extremely “controversial” move, the government of Gujarat had placed two senior ministers — Ashok Bhatt and IK Jadeja — in the Ahmedabad city police control room and the state police control room during the riots. The SIT chairman comments that the two ministers were positioned in the control rooms with “no definite charter”, fuelling the speculation that they “had been placed to interfere in police work and give wrongful decisions to the field officers”. “The fact that he (Modi) was the cabinet minister for Home would heighten the suspicion that this decision had his blessings.” (Page 12 of chairman’s comments in SIT report to SC, May 2010)

(It is to be noted that Ashok Bhatt’s cell phone analysis showed that he was in touch with VHP leader Jaideep Patel, a key conspirator of the Naroda Gaon and Naroda Patiya massacre, and with Gordhan Zadaphia, the then minister of state for home and who is now seen by the SIT as a major culprit of the Ahmedabad massacres.)

SIT Closure Report (8.2.2012) also admits that Ministers were stationed in the Control Rooms, Ahmedabad and State but says it was not a “significant” presence

“Therefore the allegation that the two ministers were positioned in the state control room and Ahmedabad city police control room by the chief minister is not established. Significantly, IK Jadeja remained at state police headquarters for two-three hours as per his own admission but did not interfere in the police functioning. Late Ashok Bhatt’s presence in the city police headquarters on the relevant day, if any, was very negligible and it cannot be termed of any material value. In the absence of documentary/oral evidence of any directions given by these two ministers to police officials, it cannot be said at this stage that they conspired in the perpetration of riots or did not take any action to control the riots” (pgs 474-475, SIT Closure Report, 8.2.2012).

V. Criminally Negligent Actions by Joint CP Tandon and SCP PB Gondia who were subsequently rewarded by the Modi government for their criminality.

The former Ahmedabad joint commissioner of police MK Tandon, in whose area around 200 Muslims were killed, has been found guilty of deliberate dereliction of duty. (Post the riots, however, far from being censored, he got one lucrative posting after another and retired as additional director general of police in June 2007.) His junior, former deputy commissioner of police PK Gondia, has also been found guilty of willfully allowing the massacres. The SIT says that if the two had just carried out their duty hundreds of Muslims could have been saved. (Pages 48-50 of the SIT Report to the SC, May 2010) Neither of these officers was held accountable by the Modi government. The first SIT report recommended further investigation as has been detailed at Annexure 2.**

Even the SIT closure report dated 8.2.2012 holds that the closure report is forced to concede that the actions of Tandon and Gondia were questionable. However, in its view, a simple departmental inquiry was all that was called for. Going back on its own earlier findings, the SIT now also exonerates Tandon and Gondia for being in close telephonic contact with two accused persons: Dr Mayaben Kodnani and Shri Jaideep Patel (p. 496, Closure Report, dated 8.2.2012).

“The conduct of Tandon and Gondia was unprofessional and unbecoming of senior police officers.” However, “the basic requirements for prosecution under the above Section (304A) are that the acts (including omission) must be rash or negligent… Considering all the circumstances, evidence on record and the defence available with the suspect police officers (Tandon and Gondia), it may not be possible to prosecute them for the offence under Section 304A as proposed by amicus curiae…” (pgs 499-503, Closure Report, 8.2.2012).

VI. SIT found evidence against Zadaphiya, MOS Home

The SIT has also found evidence against the then minister of state for home Gordhan Zadaphia (who was reporting directly to Modi) for his complicity in the riots. Another BJP minister Mayaben Kodnani has already been booked in the Naroda Patiya massacre. (Pages 168-169, SIT Report to the SC, 2010)

VII. Patently Partisan Investigations by Gujarat Police Top Cops to Shield Ministers and VHP men and Women

The SIT accepted the allegation that the state police had carried out patently shoddy investigations in the Naroda Patiya and Gulberg Society massacre cases. It deliberately overlooked the cell phone records of Sangh Parivar members and BJP leaders involved in the riots — prominent among them were the Gujarat VHP president Jaideep Patel and BJP minister Maya Kodnani. “If these records had been analysed and used as evidence, it could have established their complicity.” (SIT report to SC, May 2010, Pages 101-105)

VIII. Modi Rewarded the Officers who Acted Illegally and Punished those who Acted Lawfully
Upright officers penalised

The 2010 SIT to the SC report affirms that police officers who took a neutral stand during the riots and prevented massacres were transferred by the Gujarat government to insignificant postings. SIT’s Chairman Raghavan has termed these transfers “questionable” since “they came immediately after incidents in which the officers concerned were known to have antagonised ruling party men”. (Pages 7-8 of chairman’s comments in SIT Report to SC, May 2010)

The upright officers who were penalised for performing their constitutional duty include IPS officers Rahul Sharma, Vivek Srivastava, Himanshu Bhatt and Satishchandra Verma.
“It is true that there were a few such transfers which were in fact questionable, especially because they came immediately after incidents in which the officers concerned had known to have antagonised ruling party men… Neither police officer would however admit he had been victimised (pgs 32-36, Report to SC dated May 2010, and p. 8, Chairman’s Comments to SC, May 2010).

Guilty cops rewarded

  • The SIT report dated May 2010 to the SC admits the allegation that police officers who allowed riots to fester were rewarded with lucrative postings.
  • MK Tandon, who was the joint commissioner of police of Sector II, Ahmedabad, in 2002 and in whose jurisdiction more than 200 Muslims were butchered to death, was given the important post of inspector-general (IG), Surat range, soon after the riots. In July 2005 he was appointed to the post of ADGP (law and order) at the state police headquarters, a position with statewide jurisdiction. Tandon retired from the same position.
  • PB Gondia, deputy to Tandon, was DCP, Zone IV, at the time. He was promoted to the powerful post of IGP, State CID, and now enjoys the post of joint director, civil defence.
  • In addition to these police officers, there were other controversial bureaucrats and policemen who have remained high in the favour of the government despite their black track records. Among them are G. Subbarao (then chief secretary); Ashok Narayan (then ACS, home); PK Mishra (then PS to Modi); PC Pande (then CP, Ahmedabad city); Deepak Swaroop (then IGP, Vadodara range); K. Nityanandam (then secretary, home); Rakesh Asthana (then IG and currently CP, Surat city) and DG Vanzara (now in jail for staging encounter killings).

IX. Partisan prosecutors appointed. The SIT 2010 Report to the SC confirms that the government appointed VHP and RSS-affiliated advocates as public prosecutors in sensitive riot cases. The report states: “It appears that the political affiliation of the advocates did weigh with the government for the appointment of public prosecutors.” (Page 77 of the SIT report to the SC, May 2010) The SIT chairman (RK Raghavan) further comments that “it has been found that a few of the past appointees were in fact politically connected, either to the ruling party or organisations sympathetic to it.” (Page 10 of chairman’s comments to SIT report to SC, May 2010)

“It appears that the political affiliation of the advocates did weigh with the government for the appointment of public prosecutors” (p. 77, SIT Report to the SC, May 2010). The allegation is partly substantiated” (p. 238, SIT Report to SC May 2010). Also, “It has been found that a few of the past appointees were in fact politically connected, either to the ruling party or organisations sympathetic to it” (p. 10, Chairman’s Comments, SIT report, May 2010). Details of the partisan appointments are at Page 157 of the SIT Report to the SC and annexed here in Annexure 3.

X. Gujarat Government Misled the Chief Election Commission. The SIT Report of 2010 to the SC also asserts that in August 2002, in a bid to ensure an early Assembly election, top officials of the Modi government misled the Central Election Commission by presenting a picture of normalcy when the state was still simmering with communal tension. (Page 79 to 86, SIT Report to SC, May 2010). (The BJP had prematurely dissolved the Assembly on 19 August 2002, nine months before the expiry of the five-year term, and demanded an early election. The BJP clearly wanted to take electoral advantage of the communal polarisation.)

Ends
(Annexures 1, 2 and 3 can be accessed below:

SIT Reports on Gujarat 2002 are available at www.cjponline.org

1. IO AK Malhotra’s Report, May 2010 at http://www.cjponline.org/zakia/SIT%20Enquiry_Report_In%20ZAKIA%20CASE.pdf

2. Chairman RK Raghavan’s Comments to May 2010 report at http://www.cjponline.org/zakia/Chairman%20Raghavans%20Comments%2014.5.2010.pdf

3. Closure Report dated 8.2.2012 at
http://www.cjponline.org/zakia/SITClosReport/SIT%20Clos%20VolI%201-100.pdf
and below

  • Deb

    Everyone knows that “secular” parties position themselves as saviors of minorities and BJP positions itself as the savior of Hindus. All the statements and acts mentioned here are what you can expect from “secular” parties or BJP for their constituencies. Even then, some are distorted. e.g. the action and reaction comment. Modi did add immediately that we want neither the action nor the reaction and it is available in the video available in public domain.

    The “Clean” chit means there is no evidence to show that Modi was responsible for instigating the riots or deliberately not acting and SIT has clearly stated that.

  • John August

    Modi is a sick bastard killer of humanity people sanitize their hands after shaking hands with this chaddi dhaari aatankwaadi

  • Dr.R.K.D.Goel

    tehelka.comhttp://www.tehelka.com/vajpayee-could-have-intervened-but-did-not/ ‘Vajpayee could have intervened, but
    did not’

    Neha Dixit

    Justice JS Verma, who headed the NHRC
    during the Gujarat 2002 carnage, tells Neha Dixit that the

    Nanavati
    Commission Report is far from the truth

    Photo: AFP
    The Nanavati report states that there is absolutely no evidence of
    any lapse on the part of the Modi government in the matter of not complying
    with the NHRC recommendations.

    During
    the Gujarat riots, I was the chairperson of the NHRC.
    In the 11 orders passed by the NHRC between March 1, 2002, and July 11, 2003, two orders on
    April 1 and May 31, 2002, unequivocally indicted the state government. In the
    April order, the NHRC clearly stated that the government is doing little to stop
    the violation of fundamental rights to life and dignity of the people in
    Gujarat. A year after Godhra, a letter was also sent to the then prime
    minister, Atal Bihari
    Vajpayee, to intervene and ensure that the
    government was proceeding with adequate integrity.
    What was Vajpayee’s response?

    He could have stepped in to monitor
    the situation and issue directives to the competent authorities, but he did not
    even comment. Nothing came over, except for a formal acknowledgement from the
    Prime Minister’s Office. The report says that the government did not
    slip at all in providing protection and rehabilitation to the
    victims… This
    is false again. Many of the largest rescue camps, including Shah-e-Alam in Ahmedabad,
    did not receive visits at a high political or administrative level till I
    visited them. This indicated a deeper malaise, discriminatory in origin and
    character. In its observation on the rescue, relief and rehabilitation
    measures, the NHRC also said that numerous complaints have been received
    regarding the lack of facilities in the camps.
    You
    also raised questions on discriminatory practices during the riots. What were
    they?
    In the NHRC REPORT for 2001-02, the commission noted two matters that
    raised serious questions of discriminatory treatment. The first was the
    announcement of Rs 2 lakh to the next of kin of the karsevaks who perished in
    the attack on the Sabarmati Express, and of Rs 1 lakh for those who died in the
    riots. The second related to the application of POTA to the first incident, but
    not to the riots. These issues seriously impinge on the provisions of the
    Constitution that guarantee equality before the law and equal protection of the
    laws within the territory of India, and the prohibition of discrimination on
    grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth.
    The
    day the Nanavati Commission
    was appointed to probe the Gujarat riots, you expressed your apprehensions.
    Why?

    I had expressed my concerns as the NHRC
    head. Now that I am out of it, I have nothing to say regarding this. The Supreme Court
    set up a SIT under a former CBI director. Shouldn’t Nanavati have waited for
    their report?

    This you should ask Nanavati, not me.

    (Published
    in Tehelka Magazine, Volume 5 Issue 40, Dated 11 October 2008)

  • Dr.R.K.D.Goel

    Now those suffered in Gujarat riots of 2002 are united by giving memorandum to Collector Vadodara singed by blood=
    Read=====
    No. memorandum in blood / Communal harmony / Vadodara / /2015
    Dated 12.10.2015
    Copy of this news with my comments
    to: –
    ———————————————————————————————-
    (Read after translation in Gujarati)
    Memorandum
    written in blood=Dr.Bandukwala and others Activists= you peoples are 25 years back to giving blood signed memorandum against GUJTOK
    From: DrRKD Goel ([email protected])
    Sent:
    07 October 2015 22:14PM
    To:
    Dr.J.S. Bandukwala ([email protected])
    Cc:
    Mr. H.S. Patel IAS,Mun.Comm.VMSS
    ([email protected]); DrRKD Goel ([email protected]tmail.com); Mr. VINOD RAO IAS
    Collector Vadodara ([email protected]); Chintan Desai Secretary
    VMSS ([email protected]); Bharat Shah ([email protected]); Anandiben
    Patel Chief Minister of Gujarat ([email protected]); G.R. Aloria IAS
    ([email protected]); Radha Krishnan IPS ([email protected]);
    Secto CM ([email protected]); Secretary Home deptt. Gujarat Gov.
    ([email protected]); Rajnath Singh ([email protected]); Mr.Rati lal
    Desai ([email protected]); BJP Delhi ([email protected]); Vijay Goel
    ([email protected]); Triputi Shah PUCL ([email protected]); RKD
    Goel ([email protected])
    7 attachments
    020506=PUCL_letter_against_Solanki.doc
    (35.4 KB) ,
    040506=Vododara_Mayor_Solanki_MustResign=Sabrang_Alternative_News_Network_SANN.doc
    (60.6 KB) , 07042015=Mr. H.S.Patel for EWS allotments. Not made ghettos at
    one place.docx (17.5 KB) , 31052015= Dear Mr. Aloria Chief
    Secretary.=request for help of Kalyan Nagar Slum Dwellers of Vadodara.docx
    (12.9 KB) , 28042015=Photo of a house of Jamwadi demolished in 2000..doc
    (1391.7 KB), 25082008=Warning of Fidayeen attack by=Mr. B.Raman.docx (17.1
    KB) , 28112008=Email warns of more strikes.docx (16.7 KB)
    Dated: 07.10.2015
    Subject: – Memorandum written in blood = Dr.Bandukwala and others Activists= you peoples are 25 years back in giving blood
    signed memorandum against GUJTOK to Collector. All know what is going on in Vadodara from
    1990 after RAM Rath Yatra by Mr.L.K.Advani, BJP leader.
    Dear Dr. Bandukwala.
    All know your suffering from 27.2.2002 with other innocent peoples of Gujarat not only Muslims but Hindus also
    Your biggest mistake was / is that you run away from Vadodara when your house was torched on 27 / 28.2.2002 by a Hindu mob and not
    filed FIR against the perpetrators those burn your house.
    The PUCL members were with you in your trouble. You recognized
    all the Saffron leaders those attacked on your house and on your family on the morning of 28.02.2002 / 01.03.2002.
    Your neighbor Hindus helped you to save you and your
    daughter’s life.
    If you have filed an FIR against the perpetrator those were
    in the mob. Today all those culprits of Vadodara are roaming free. Resulting, those people involved become more active without fear of Law. Gujarat’s 2002 riots in Vadodara Continued up to May, 2002.
    You know Tehelka reports and NHRC reports. As well as other reports and SITInvestigations.
    On 9.8.2003 the TOI reported that Congress is silent on Gujarat 2002 riots.
    Muslim terrorists SIMI / Indian Mujahedeen’s did the bomb blasts in different part of India. Our UPA I and II from 2004 to 2014 only arrested innocent Muslims in all Bomb blasts. Kept them in Jails for several years.
    Hope the memorandum signed in blood by Human Right Activists
    against GUJCTOC may bring some change in the people’s mind of Fantasist Activists of both Muslims and Hindus of India.
    But this Act will again be used against one community. If
    all will be dealt equally then only this Act will bring some fruits.
    Now dear Dr Bandukwalaji the Muslim Educated students of
    India are attracted to ISIS. Communal harmony has gone from your hands also to maintain communal harmony, for which you got awards.
    PUCL is an all India / World Organization to bring peace in
    India. Let us pray to Almighty God only
    for peace in India / Gujarat between all communities; Hindus / Muslims / Jats / Christians and poor Dalits.
    I am much more sufferer from 1996 also in Vadodara till 2015 by my own Hindu Saffron Parivar.
    Thanks
    yours truly,
    Dr.R.K.D.Goel
    President: Forum of Whistle-Blowers of India. Ph; 0265-2647677 Vadodara.390 009

  • Dr.R.K.D.Goel

    Read== My letter to the CM of U.P. dated: 01.01.2014 ====
    Mr. B.J.Ganatra, Metropolitian Magistrate Gave Clean Chit to Mr. Narendra Modi for 2002 riots of Gujarat.‏Blammed UP Govt.
    From: Dr.R.K.D. Goel ([email protected])
    Sent: 01 January 2014 00:25AM
    To: Akhilesh Yadav ([email protected])
    Cc: DrRKD Goel ([email protected]); Dr.J.S. Bandukwala ([email protected]); [email protected] ([email protected])
    5 attachments (Read in your e-mail)
    29122013=Clean Chit to Modi by Mr. B.J.Ganatra=But blamed to CM of UP not to take actions against Safffron Parivar.docx (16.1 KB) , 01052006=Demolish shrines obstructing roads HC.doc (35.5 KB) , Communalism Watch-Surat 1992-93.docx (19.0 KB) , 030508=Indian_judiciary_still_delivers_Shree_Kumar.doc (86.0 KB) , 03112007=Tehelka- Vadodata Burnt city.docx (52.2 KB)

    01.01.2014 to : –
    Mr. Akhilesh Yadav,
    Hon. Chief Minister of UP,
    Hon. Sir,
    Have you read clean chit given by
    Mr. B.J.Ganatra, Metropolitian Magistrate to Mr. Narendra Modi for 2002 riots of Gujarat?

    He further said that UP Government responsible not to curbing the suspicious activities of Kar Sevaks belonging to BJP / RSS / VHP/ Bajrang Dal in Ayodhiya.

    The demolition of Babri Masjid case was in 1992.

    But the SIT reference was of 2002 Gujarat riots about role of Mr. Narendra Modi.

    It is a shocking for the UP people / CMs those are blamed.

    If the UP is responsible then now cases against the Saffron Parivar those demolished the Babri Masjid on 6.12.1992 under the leadership of Mr. L.K.Advani should be taken up by the Chief minister of UP to defame UP.

    I belong Muzaffarnagar (UP) borne on 1936.

    What happened in Muzaffarnagar against Muslims in 2013?

    Now the Muslims lost confidence in Jats and SP party.
    There will be no communal harmony in UP.

    What happened in Muzaffarnagar in 2013 is 1000 times than 2002 riots of Gujarat against Muslims.
    Thanks
    Yours truly,
    Dr. R.K.D.Goel. A 78 years old now settled in Gujarat from 1973 for 40 years.
    Please read attached letter.