Retd IAS’ memoir questions Narendra Modi’s role in Gujarat riots

Published: Wednesday, Jan 9, 2013, 13:03 IST
By DNA Correspondent | Place: Ahmedabad | Agency: DNA

It has been more than a decade, but the ugly chapter in Gujarat’s modern history, which killed many of its people, continues to haunt memories. The post-Godhra communal violence of 2002 has been mentioned by retired IAS officer of Gujarat-cadre Javid Chowdhury in his autobiography titled The insider’s view – Memoirs of a Public Servant, published in 2012.

In 2002, the 1965-batch IAS officer was posted as secretary in Union ministry of health and family welfare in the then NDA government headed by BJP’s Atal Bihari Vajpayee.

The 18th chapter of the book ‘Discharge of Rajdharma? 2002’ recounts how the Narendra Modi government browbeat prime minister Vajpayee’s offer of medical aid for the victims and summarily maintained that the situation was ‘normal’ in state, despite the PM’s information that it was not.

Modi did not allow the then Union health minister to visit Shah Alam relief camp nor did he go there himself, despite explicit orders by the PM to do so. Chowdhury says, the then state health minister, late Ashok Bhatt, threatened to jump out of the moving car if the central minister insisted on visiting the Shah Alam camp.

He also recounts the events and incidents, which bring out in no uncertain terms, the discomfort of the NDA regime at the incidents in Gujarat, particularly Vajpayee, who is already known to have chastised Modi for not following his ‘Rajdharma’.

Over and above highlighting the sequence of events that betray the Modi government’s partisan attitude towards minority community’s victims of violence, Chowdhury lets out a heartfelt lament at the failure of civil servants in the state to discharge their duties towards the Constitution of the country and its people.

On Sunday, former DGP of Gujarat RB Sreekumar wrote a letter to the Nanavati-Mehta Commission and chairman of Special Investigation Team RK Raghavan, highlighting specifics from Chowdhury’s book, which he claims corroborates the many facts cited by him in his nine affidavits and other documents submitted before the Commission.

“The narration (in Chowdhury’s book) would also authenticate the unethical strategy of the state government to suppress facts about the then precarious situation in the state, in order to make the central government and citizens to believe what the state government wanted them to believe,” Sreekumar has said in the letter.

SIT has not considered his affidavits and submissions as evidence in the reports submitted by them, especially in the case of Gulbarg Society where Modi is one of the accused, for want of corroboration of facts.

Chowdhury also recounts a review meeting in Delhi with Vajpayee after the riots, where the PM is distinctly uncomfortable with Modi’s ‘powerpoint presentation’ giving the impression that the situation in Gujarat is normal. In fact, he writes that Vajpayee, in that meeting, categorically disagreed with Modi for shutting down riot camps so soon after the incident as also the very small amount of compensation given to the victims, and was concerned about how they would rebuild their lives.

A defiant Modi argued that extended camps heightened tension and delayed the return to normalcy. “The PM had pushed his point to the maximum. If he pushed it more, there would be an open rift,” Chowdhury has observed. Union home minister LK Advani present in the meeting “did not utter a word. He was reported to be suffering from laryngitis – no one clarified whether it was viral or diplomatic!” the book says.

2013- A New Year Wishlist # Humor



My New Year Wish List For 2013

By Satya Sagar

30 December, 2012

Here are some things I fervently wish will happen in the coming year.

1. Scientists find a way to render in an instant every real or wannabe rapist (including scientists) permanently impotent.

2. All policemen are put away in prison and the inmates put in their uniforms to improve the law and order situation.

3. A fisherwoman is appointed Chairperson of the Department of Atomic Energy and the Koodamkulam nuclear reactor is turned into an aquarium.

4. Manmohan and Montek Singh finally become eligible for pension from the United States government and migrate leaving the people of India in peace.

5. Rahul Gandhi finally becomes Prime Minister, of Robert Vadra’s real estate.

6. Atal Behari Vajpayee’s knees finally get better while Narendra Modi’s get worse.

7. The Sheikhs of Saudi Arabia are overthrown by their people after it is found they are aliens with petrol instead of blood in their veins.

8. Mahinda Rajapaksa and his coterie flee Sri Lanka and seek asylum in the Congo and the company of the many genocide artists there.

9. Vladimir Putin tries to impress the Russian people by shooting off alone into space in a rocket, with enough fuel to reach Mars but not return to Earth.

10. Barack Obama undergoes plastic surgery and becomes a white man. Since he is no different from earlier US Presidents why pretend to be Black?

11. China and Japan decide to stop fighting over ownership of a tiny, insignificant islandand instead jointly take over the United States.

12. All those who predicted Apocalypse in December 2012 have their property confiscated and distributed to the poorest of those who didn’t believe their prophecy.

Happy New Year!

Satya Sagar is a writer, journalist and public health worker based in New Delhi. He is also an associate editor at He can be reached


#India- (UAPA) Draconian Law against liberty-quietly amended #Loksabha

From The Indian Express:

The Lok Sabha has quietly amended the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, a dangerous tool in the hands of any government

When two young women were arrested for a Facebook post questioning the shutdown in Mumbai for Bal Thackeray’s funeral, middle-class fury forced the Maharashtra government to drop the case and suspend two police officers.The Centre also issued a set of guidelines to avoid misuse of the controversial Section 66A of the Information Technology Act. However, even as calls for repeal of the “vague” and “wide” provisions of the IT law that are “susceptible to wanton abuse” grew louder, the government silently pushed through much more controversial amendments to the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) in the Lok Sabha, making it further mirror previous draconian laws like POTA and TADA.

The amendments did not merely make this law more stringent; they have made law enforcement agencies less accountable, despite substantial proof of misuse. The government had, in fact, brought in several amendments to give “anti-terror teeth” to the UAPA coinciding with the repeal of POTA in 2004, and more stringent amendments were pushed through in the backdrop of the 2008 Mumbai attacks.

The vast scope for the misuse of the amendments to the UAPA has been articulated in the recent citizens’ appeal to members of the Rajya Sabha, issued by the Jamia Teachers’ Solidarity Association (JTSA), which has been endorsed by several senior civil rights groups, scholars and activists. The appeal has questioned five aspects of the amended law.

The broad definition of person, especially as “an association of persons or a body of individuals, whether incorporated or not” is open to misuse because “this will actually allow agencies and government to create persons beyond that what are recognised by law and any group of friends/ acquaintances can be labelled an association of persons or a body of individuals by the agencies and the government” like a “book reading club to friends who meet every evening at a dhaba may be deemed to be an association of persons or a body of individuals”.

Another major amendment to the law has been to include economic offences within the larger definition of a “terrorist act”. There are two aspects of this amendment that have raised questions. The criminalisation of “production, distribution of high-quality counterfeit currency” is “repetitive” and are already “covered by the equivalent sections 489B, 489C, 489D in the IPC”. The civil rights activists question this amendment, arguing that “when comparable provisions in IPC and terror laws are available for same crimes, the police exercise the option of booking an accused under the terror law because it affords them greater leverage: bail provisions are much more stringent and the accused can be kept in custody for long periods (up to 180 days) without the filing of a chargesheet”.

Another amendment broadens the scope of action against fund raising for “terror activities”. Now, the raising of funds likely to be used (in full or in part) to commit a terrorist act or for the benefit of terrorists shall be punishable irrespective of whether the funds have been raised from legitimate or illegitimate sources. This is irrespective of whether such funds were actually used to commit a terror act or not. And it is punishable for a term not less than five years, but extendable to life.

The only safeguard is the condition that the accused should know that “such funds are likely to be used… by a terrorist organisation”. The civil rights activists apprehend that this amendment will “practically bring under the possibility of prosecution all transactions, even perfectly legitimate ones, without any remote connection to a terrorist act” because “all that the prosecution needs to show is that the accused had knowledge that such funds could be likely used for terrorist act. While such subjective knowledge may again be difficult to prove, it will no doubt result in the incarceration of accused for long periods without bail”.

While the introduction of several new changes has already made the UAPA exceptionally harsh, the amendment of Section 6 of the law has taken away the little hope for judicial scrutiny to prevent its misuse.

The ban on an organisation under the UAPA, which was earlier limited to a two-year period, has been extended to a five-year period. This means that the government has avoided putting its decision to ban an organisation under the UAPA through the scrutiny of a tribunal headed by a sitting judge of the High Court. For example, the tribunal hearing the ban on the Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) did not only look into the legality of the government’s decision, but it also helped to record and raise the issue of fabricated evidence in individual cases across states. The government’s logic, that extending the ban to five years is to lower the costs to administer the ban, is flawed because the delay in such a judicial scrutiny would make law enforcement less accountable.

There is enough evidence that scores of young Muslim men were branded members of the banned SIMI and arrested. The terror tag was enough to create an atmosphere of public revulsion and they were guilty till proven innocent. There are cases where these men were unable to manage a lawyer who would defend them because several bar associations had banned their members from representing these “terror suspects”. There are examples where verses of the Quran, religious books and even Urdu literature were shown as incriminating material. There were instances where young men were arrested for “shouting slogans against the government” because they were “angry about the demolition of Babri mosque or Gujarat riots”.

Under the normal procedure of criminal law, these acts would have been inconsequential. But once the police branded them as members of the banned SIMI, it automatically invoked the provisions of the UAPA, magnifying the seriousness of the charges. And even once these men win long and tiring battles in courts and are acquitted after years of imprisonment, the terror taint stays, making it extremely difficult to pick up the pieces of their lives and start afresh.

To understand as to why these stringent amendments to the UAPA are especially dangerous, we need to return to the debate in Parliament when this law was enacted, in 1967. Atal Bihari Vajpayee had called this law a “donkey that had been made to look like a horse” while George Fernandes had “moved an amendment that the period of ban be reduced to one year”. While opposing the UAPA bill, noted parliamentarian Nath Pai had termed it “a measure introduced by a group of men who have lost faith in the people of India”. Nath Pai had addressed the then home minister Y.B. Chavan and asked, “Will the baton of the police be the final guardian of the liberties, freedom and unity of this country? Can we trust the police to be the only fighter for the delicate fabric of our democracy?” Piloo Mody, who represented Godhra in the Lok Sabha, had said that he was “ashamed of the government”. J.B. Kripalani, who had been chairman of the Fundamental Rights sub- committee, had said that “all these repressive laws violate the rule of law”. He had termed the UAPA “superfluous”, one that “may be used by the executive for purposes for which it is not intended”. He had said that he did not question the intentions of the government. “Their intentions are good but it is like putting a sword in the hands of Hanuman. Hanuman may not like to kill, but somehow the sword kills”.

This time, the passage of amendments to the UAPA in the Lok Sabha happened amid the din of a debate over FDI in retail. Unlike the larger consensus over the need to preserve the freedoms on Facebook, there isn’t even a public debate over the UAPA and its misuse, because, in the dominant public discourse, its victims are deemed guilty till proven innocent.

PLease click here for critique of draconian laws



Kractivism-Gonaimate Videos

Protest to Arrest

Faking Democracy- Free Irom Sharmila Now

Faking Democracy- Repression Anti- Nuke activists


Kamayaninumerouno – Youtube Channel


Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 6,227 other followers

Top Rated

Blog Stats

  • 1,849,846 hits


December 2021
%d bloggers like this: