Planning Commission releases study praising Gujarat’s success in manufacturing, focus on MSMEs

A new study, conducted for the Planning Commission, explains in detail how Gujarat has facilitated the growth of micro, small and medium enterprises, and emerged as among the top States in manufacturing. 

A new report, released by the Planning Commission, praises Gujarat for its innovative initiatives to promote the job-generating, growth-driving manufacturing sector. The report explains in detail how Gujarat has facilitated the growth of micro, small and medium enterprises, and emerged as among the top States in manufacturing. This finding negates the politically-motivated baseless allegation that only big industry is promoted in Gujarat.

The study, ‘Survey on Business Regulatory Environment for Manufacturing – State Level Assessment’, has been conducted by Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu India Private Limited (DTTIPL). Commissioned by the Planning Commission, the release of the report coincides with Commerce and Industry Minister Anand Sharma’s desperate attempt to downplay the DIPP-funded study on improving India’s business regulatory environment that hailed Gujarat’s land acquisition policy as the best in the country.

The ‘Gujarat Model’ just cannot be wished away, no matter how hard the detractors of the BJP’s Prime Ministerial candidate Narendra Modi, who as Chief Minister of Gujarat has taken the State to new heights of economic success, try to disprove facts. Anand Sharma will now have to contend with the report commissioned by the Planning Commission which supplements the findings of the DIPP-funded study.

The DTTIPL study has highlighted Gujarat’s iNDEXTb initiative which serves the dual purpose of facilitating enterprise and monitoring the implementation of investment proposals. The study says, “iNDEXTb is a nodal agency under the Industries Commissionerate, Government of Gujarat for providing hand-holding support to entrepreneurs. The Investor Facilitation Portal developed by iNDEXTb facilitates monitoring of investment proposals by generating MIS reports, which can be used by officials to identify applications on which action has not been taken within the stipulated time frame.”

The study points out how iNDEXTb assists entrepreneurs by helping them finalise their choice of location for setting up a manufacturing unit. This is done by providing critical information on access to three key basic inputs – land, power and water. The Investor Facilitation Portal’s assistance is available for micro, small and medium enterprises (MSMEs) as well as large enterprises across all sectors. The facilitation is for both setting up new industries as well as for expanding existing manufacturing units.

“Some of the States have developed GIS-based software which shows mapping of land plots in industrial estates,” the study says, adding, “The real time vacancy details can be checked by applicants and the applicants can select plots based on analysis of such location.” Citing the example of Gujarat, the study says, “iNDEXTb has a GIS-based software which shows the geographic mapping of industrial areas in Gujarat, including highways, GPCB zones, CRZs, port connectivity, soil quality, power and utilities grid connectivity, etc.”

Knocking the bottom out of mendacious allegation leveled by the detractors of Narendra Modi that the State Government promotes only a few big companies, the report says: “For reaching out to micro enterprises, iNDEXTb has set up kiosks at 26 district industries centres. These kiosks are equipped with infrastructure facilities such as internet connectivity, printer and scanner.”

The study refrains from assigning ranks to States. What it has done is to cluster States on the basis of six parameters. These are: finance and tax related compliances; labour law related compliances; infrastructure and utility related approvals; land and building related approvals; environmental clearances; and, other business regulatory compliances.

States have been clustered in three categories – ‘Top’ 33.33 percentile of States; ‘Middle’ 33.33 percentile of States; and, ‘Bottom’ 33.33 percentile of States.

The findings of the study show that Gujarat figures among the ‘Top’ category comprising nine States that have been assessed on all six parameters. Gujarat figures among the top States on four select parameters – finance and tax related compliances; infrastructure and utility related approvals; land and building related approvals; and, other business regulatory compliances. On environmental clearance, Gujarat has been put in the ‘Middle’ category of States. Only on labour law related compliances, Gujarat is placed in the ‘Bottom’ category of States.

Explaining the last categorisation, an analyst said “this classification can be turned around to trash the allegation that the Modi Government does not protect the interests of workers. The fact is that the Government protects the overall interests, which can at times be conflicting, of all stakeholders by holding growth and development for all as the supreme objective.”

The study comes with the rider that it solely focuses on assessing the existing business regulatory framework in individual States. “Other key factors that impact the performance of manufacturing units, like quality of infrastructure, availability of natural resources, market linkages, labour and skill availability, access to finance, etc, have not been covered in the current study,” it says, adding, “Consequently, the relative standing of individual States may differ from their relative contribution to India’s manufacturing GDP.”

Elaborating on this point, the study explains, “For example, a particular State may have been identified as being relatively mature in its business regulatory environment but may not have an equivalent standing in terms of contribution to India’s manufacturing GDP owing to limited natural resources within its geographic boundaries.”

Commenting on Gujarat’s success in manufacturing sector, it notes that the State ranked second in the country in terms of share of manufacturing GDP, contributing around 13.7 per cent of manufacturing GDP in 2011-12. The State’s manufacturing sector contributed 28.2 per cent to Gujarat’s GSDP in 2011-12, with a CAGR of 9.5 per cent between 2007-08 and 2011-12. The sector employed around 3.4 million people in 2009-10 representing 13.7 per cent of Gujarat’s working population.

Referring to interaction with industries, the study says: “It is understood that Gujarat is a power surplus State with respondents expressing satisfaction on quality and availability of power. It was also indicated that quality and availability of water has improved over the years.  Road network and rail connectivity have also shown improvement.”

Incredible ignorance

A response to Salil Tripathi - II

Facts are sacred; comment is free.


In his column ‘Here, There, Everywhere’, published in Mint under the headline “Incredible impunity” on February 29, 2012, Mr Salil Tripathi displays incredible ignorance (I sincerely mean no offence for he is a writer gifted with incredible intelligence) of Gujarat’s incredible economic growth and incredible prosperity, both of which are the envy of every State in the country.

The economic development and growth, and the consequent prosperity, witnessed in Gujarat have whetted the aspirations of Indians from Kashmir to Kanyakumari. They have brought about a paradigm shift in the people’s expectations from their Government – in their respective States; at the Centre. All this, of course, is inconsequential to Mr Tripathi who is neither impressed nor moved by Gujarat’s giant strides!

Reluctant to use the term ‘Modi Model’ for reasons that do not merit elaboration, a senior CPI(M) leader of West Bengal, reflecting on what went wrong with the Left Front that led to its decimation in the 2011 Assembly election, ruefully told me: “If only we had worked towards adopting the Gujarat Model…”

Those who are determined to demonise Mr Narendra Modi and deny him any credit for the ‘Gujarat Model’ of remarkable growth and prosperity are welcome to live in cussed denial, but that won’t change the ground reality – Gujarat’s economy has grown; Gujaratis (both Hindus and Muslims) have prospered. Nor will it influence the manner in which investors at home and abroad view the State.

Vibrant Gujarat has set new standards for other States to emulate. That entrepreneurs from other States, including Jammu & Kashmir, want to set up their businesses in Gujarat explains what sets this State apart from others. That difference is on account of the political leadership of the day.

Comparisons, as the adage goes, can be odious. Hence they are best avoided. But since Mr Tripathi has compared Gujarat to Maharashtra in a strenuous effort to belittle the former’s achievements, it would be in order to not only suggest that he and other critics of Mr Narendra Modi should revisit the socio-economic profiles of the two States for a closer scrutiny of details, but to also point out that a vast gulf separates these two States.

That gulf is about probity in public life; it’s about the integrity of those who are in charge of the Government; it’s about, to put it in two words, good governance.

Mr Tripathi is right when he says Gujaratis are an enterprising lot and that they have always done better than other Indians, even in trying circumstances – for instance, when Chimanbhai was Chief Minister of the State, the man who was known as “Chiman Chor”. Gujarat’s economic growth and prosperity over the past decade has been accompanied by a thorough cleansing of the system. Mr Narendra Modi can justly claim: “Na khata hoon na khilata hoon.”

That, understandably, leaves many disconsolate.

Stray statistics, confusing and plucked at random, find mention in Mr Tripathi’s column: They have been quoted to put down Gujarat. I can only cite from official documents a set of statistics that I have cross-checked with friends in the Planning Commission:

Gross Domestic Product: At current prices, Gujarat’s share at Rs 5,13,173 crore is 7.17 per cent of India’s GDP. At constant prices (2004-05), it’s Rs 3,65,295 crore, or 7.48 per cent of India’s GDP.

Net Domestic Product: At current prices, Gujarat’s share at Rs 4,40,942 crore is 6.89 per cent of India’s NDP. At constant prices (2004-05), it’s Rs 3,09,409 crore, or 7.16 per cent of India’s NDP.

Per Capita Income: At current prices, it is Rs 75,115 compared to the national average of Rs 53,331. At constant prices (2004-05), it’s Rs 52,708 compared to the national average of Rs 35,993.

Monthly Per Capita Consumer Expenditure (NSS 2009-10): In rural areas of Gujarat it is Rs 1,065 compared to the national average of Rs 953. In urban areas it is Rs 1,914 compared to the national average of Rs 1,856.

While the manufacturing sector and agriculture have suffered huge reversals across the country in the recent years under the UPA’s tutelage, Gujarat has bucked the trend. Manufacturing and agriculture continue to register impressive growth in the State. In 2002-03, ports in Gujarat were handling 841 lakh tonnes of goods; in 2010-11, that figure had grown to 2,309 lakh tonnes.

Mr Tripathi mocks at Mr Narendra Modi’s claim that Gujarat will soon be in a position to provide power to power-starved States. He overlooks the fact that Gujarat is the only State which can today boast of 24x7 power supply to industry, farms and homes. It’s absurd to compare Gujarat’s power generation capacity (GSEB alone produces 4,996 MW) to that of north-eastern States. The former has heavy industrial and agricultural demand for power; the latter has virtually none.

I wish Mr Tripathi had compared the power situation in Gujarat with that which prevails in Maharashtra or Uttar Pradesh (where I live and hence am acquainted with the reality) or India's capital city, Delhi (where I work and hence am also acquainted with the reality).

The comparison reminds me of how Jyoti Basu had once proudly proclaimed that Calcutta, as Kolkata was then known, had left behind its terrible days and nights of relentless ‘load-shedding’. What he forgot to mention is that West Bengal had left behind its glory days as the industrial hub of the eastern hinterland.

I could go on citing statistical details, but the list is far too long. Those who are interested in the specifics will find them in the latest Socio-Economic Review of Gujarat. A patient reading will tell you why it’s incorrect (and grossly unfair) to try and diminish Gujarat’s spectacular social and economic achievements.

“So many things work properly in Gujarat that it hardly feels like India,” the Economist said in a review of Gujarat’s economy. The report was telling published under the headline, “India's Guangdong: A north-western State offers a glimpse of a possible industrial future for India.” The report can be read here.

Mr Tripathi has chosen to play fast and loose while discussing Gujarat’s commitment to fiscal responsibility. It’s possible he is not aware of the minutiae of the FRBM Act and the fact that the 13th Finance Commission has set targets for each State Government and every State has to periodically report progress which is documented. Compared to other States, Gujarat has been well ahead of meeting the targets that were set for its compliance to fiscal responsibility. The details are available over here for those who are interested in the specifics.

Admittedly, nobody is perfect. If Mr Narendra Modi is guilty of anything, it is of pursuing purposeful policies of enablement and empowerment of all, irrespective of gender, caste and faith, while eschewing wasteful policies of entitlement. That’s where the 'Modi Model', or call it the 'Gujarat Model' if you wish, stands out in stark contrast to the 'NAC Model'.

That, understandably, leaves many incandescent with rage.

(To be continued.)

Here, There, Nowhere...

A response to Salil Tripathi - I

1984 and 2002 are not comparable.


Rarely, if ever, have I commented on an article penned by a fellow writer. That’s not because I do not react to what they have to say or I hold views with which I disagree as not worthy of comment. It’s largely because writers must be allowed to have their say (and space) and partly on account of the fact that I try not to bruise feelings. I am known for not bothering with vacuous niceties; it makes sense not to compound that shortcoming by penning my opinion on the views of other writers.

Yet, I feel compelled to react, in writing, to Mr Salil Tripathi’s column, ‘Here, There, Everywhere’, which appears in Mint, a Delhi-based newspaper, that has been published under the headline “Incredible impunity” on February 29, 2012. The strap line reads: “Of all the potential and credible contenders to be the next Prime Minister, the one least deserving is Narendra Modi.” It’s a free world and this country is still a democracy where freedom of thought, expression and speech, though circumscribed by restrictive laws, is not entirely absent from the public domain.

Hence, Mr Tripathi has the right to not only believe that it is his burden to decide for more than a billion resident Indians who is the most and least deserving contender to be the next Prime Minister but also express that belief in suitable words, which he has done in his column. My response to his views is not an attempt to shout him down or point out why he is wrong in saying what he says, but to posit a set of counter-views. I have no intention to play evangelist to a heathen or convert a non-believer; such lofty tasks are best left to those who mistake their writing desk for a pulpit and their chair as a pedestal.

Mr Tripathi is outraged that those who cannot stop raging over the retaliatory violence which followed the arson attack on coach S-6 of Sabarmati Express on February 27, 2002, at Godhra, in which 58 Hindu men, women and children were killed, should be reminded of the anti-Sikh pogrom (it was definitely not a ‘riot’) of 1984 by those who are not impressed by the ceaseless cant of the self-righteous and sanctimonious army of the good and the virtuous. He sees this as a “despicable” attempt to equate the two unfortunate events (my words, not his) of our recent history. I would agree with him.

The hideous blood-letting by Congress goons that we witnessed in Delhi and several cities even before Mrs Indira Gandhi’s mortal remains were consigned to the flames cannot, by any stretch of the imagination, be equated with the ghastly violence that gripped parts of Gujarat after the torching of coach S-6 of Sabarmati Express by a Muslim mob. There are three reasons why any attempt at comparing the two tragic events would be immoral and wrong.

First, the scale of violence is incomparable, as is the loss of lives and property. With the help of documentary evidence and those who fought (and are still fighting, although with receding hope) for justice for the victims of the anti-Sikh pogrom, I had computed the death toll to be not less than 4,733. Most of the deaths occurred in Delhi. In the post-Godhra riots, 1,044 people (not “thousands” as Mr Tripathi says) were killed: 790 Muslims and 254 Hindus. Lest I be accused of being callous, let me hasten to add that I believe every life matters and even one death is one too many.

Second, the Government of India, which was then (and still remains) responsible for maintaining law and order in Delhi, refused to lift a finger in admonition, leave alone crack down on mobs of Congress hoodlums led by Congress cronies of the party’s first family, for 72 hours. The Congress, and the Government which was then headed by Rajiv Gandhi (whom Mr Tripathi is keen to exonerate) wanted to “teach the Sikhs a lesson” -- the crime of a few individuals was converted into a collective crime deserving of collective retribution. As Rajiv Gandhi was to later declare, without the slightest trace of contrition or remorse, “When a giant tree falls, the earth below shakes.”

In contrast, Mr Narendra Modi decided to call in the Army when it became clear that the State police were incapable of controlling the rioting mobs. Nearly all the 254 Hindus who died in the violence were killed in police or Army firing. Not a single tormentor of Sikhs suffered so much as a lathi-blow in 1984. But let that pass. Could Mr Narendra Modi have done better? Could he have stamped out the riots before they exacted a terrible toll? Could he have ensured absolute peace and calm despite the provocation of the arson attack at Godhra?

These are questions that can be debated till the cows come home (the reference to cows, Mr Tripathi, is idiomatic and not an attempt to push what you would derisively call the ‘Hindutva agenda’) without reaching a conclusion that is acceptable to all. I’d say he tried his best; others like Mr Tripathi would say he didn’t. I would stand by my truth just as others would stand by their perceived truth. A cock fight of truths does not excite me.

We could, however, look at how ‘successful’ other Chief Ministers have been in controlling riots. For instance, we could look at riots in Uttar Pradesh, in Bihar, in Andhra Pradesh, in Maharashtra, in West Bengal, in Assam, in Tamil Nadu, in Kerala, in Karnataka, in Rajasthan, in Madhya Pradesh, in Odisha -- virtually every State of the Union. Each one of these riots is well documented. Each one of them resulted in a terrible loss of lives and property -- well, not really because often the victims were too poor to own any property.

I don’t know if Mr Tripathi has ever found himself trapped in a riot; I have seen the Jamshedpur riot of 1979 from close quarters. When blood-lust grips people, when insanity takes over, even shoot-at-sight orders don’t have the desired result. In Jamshedpur I saw tribal Christians looting the homes of Hindus and Muslims while they battled in the streets: What does that tell us of a riot?

In Maliana, the PAC was accused of playing a partisan role. Shall we then hold Vir Bahadur Singh, the then Congress Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh, personally responsible for that massacre? Nellie wouldn’t have happened had Mrs Indira Gandhi not insisted on holding a disputed election in Assam. Should we then blame her for the massacre of 2,191 people, a vast number of them suckling infants? We could go further back in history and blame Jawaharlal Nehru for the Great Calcutta Killing of August 1946, for it could be argued, and convincingly so, that had it not been for his cussedness Mohammed Ali Jinnah wouldn't have called for Direct Action.

Third, no two incidents of communal violence are comparable. The causative factors differ as do local political, social and cultural dynamics. How can we then compare 1984 to 2002? More so when 1984 was a state-sponsored pogrom endorsed by the then Prime Minister of India, an endorsement that reverberated in his infamous declaration that the earth is bound to shake when a giant tree falls?

It would, then, be asked, why is 1984 mentioned at all in the context of 2002? Here’s the reason why: Intolerant ‘secularists’, sanctimonious leftists and self-righteous liberals who are unsparing in their criticism of Mr Narendra Modi take extraordinary care in steering clear of even remotely accusing the Congress, let alone Rajiv Gandhi, of complicity in the mind-numbing brutalities of 1984.

I hold Mr Tripathi in high esteem. Had I not done so I’d have been appalled by his exertions to exonerate Rajiv Gandhi who knew what was happening in Delhi and made it a point to turn a deaf ear to pitiful cries for help and groveling appeals by noted Sikh personalities.

Did he do so because he was in mourning?

Rajiv Gandhi’s grief and anguish did not quite stand in the way of his decision to take oath as Prime Minister the same day his mother was assassinated. That swearing in ceremony could have waited till the last rites were performed. But he chose not to wait lest the crown be snatched from him. Mr Pranab Mukherjee still pays the price for an indiscrete comment made earlier that day. So let’s not say with disarming certitude that “presumably Rajiv Gandhi had other things on his mind (like grief) than planning a pogrom”.

(To be continued.)

Our intellectual Cossacks!

Non-stop rant against Narendra Modi!

The Left-liberal commentariat has gone to extraordinary length to prove Narendra Modi's three-day fast as part of his 'Sadbhavana Mission' was "meaningless" and "lacked credibility". In a democracy, opinion is free (though facts remain sacred) and we must learn to live with such outpouring of vitriol by those who claim to be 'unbiased' and 'bipartisan' but are exactly what they say they are not.

True, the hate-steeped commentary denouncing Narendra Modi is anything but fair criticism. It is hate speech aimed at vilifying, defaming and maligning a visionary leader who has changed the face of Gujarat and, if given the opportunity, will change the face of India by putting the country on the path of rapid development and equitable growth. But our commentariat thinks crass abuse is criticism. So be it.

Narendra Modi believes in India, he is proud of the nation and enthuses the country's youth. That rankles with the commentariat and activists, and understandably so.

But if Narendra Modi's three-day fast, which ended on Monday evening, was truly "meaningless" and of "no consequence", why did his critics, especially in the 'secular' media, expend so much time and energy in denouncing it? Logically, they should have just ignored the event.

The fact of the matter, as the cliche goes, is that the louder their criticism, the shriller their denunciation, the greater is their alarm and panic. The raucous cacophony of voices we have heard in media these past three days is a measure of the frustration among the self-righteous, sanctimonious critics of Narendra Modi.

Why else would they quote Ramvilas Paswan in their defence?

In my Sunday column, Coffee Break, of January 22, 2011, headlined 'India awaits the NaMo model', I had recalled a Cossack folktale while commenting on Narendra Modi's critics who can see nothing good or right about him:

A young Cossack, who was a gifted horseman, dreamed of owning the best steed in the village where he lived. So he toiled and saved money to buy his dream horse, and eagerly waited for the annual animal fair that was held in a nearby village. At last, the big day came and our young Cossack set off for the fair, dressed in his Sunday best. He inspected all the horses on sale and finally found a stallion with a flowing mane, flaring nostrils, rippling muscles and a glistening white fleece. This was the horse he had dreamt of and toiled for! The owner asked for a huge sum, our young Cossack paid the money without even bothering to haggle over the price. Horse bought, its proud new owner mounted the steed and cantered home. He rode straight to the village square where his fellow Cossacks gathered every Sunday evening for raucous drunken revelry, dismounted and called them over to show off his new horse. A collective gasp was heard as the Cossacks gathered around: None had seen a more handsome stallion than this. One of them patted the horse and praised his strength; another counted his teeth and declared he couldn’t be more than a year old; a third ran his fingers through the mane and sighed. The village elder was so impressed that he declared the stallion the official stud of the village horse collective and ordered a fresh round of vodka for everybody. Then along came the village cynic, who was also the local correspondent of Pravda and the designated Cossack ‘intellectual’. He walked around the horse, went back to where he had been sitting sipping vodka, struck a pose similar to Rodin’s Thinker, got up after a while, walked back to the horse, lifted its tail, sniffed and declared, in a stentorian voice similar to that in which judges give their final verdict, “The horse stinks.”

The non-stop rant in newspapers and on news telly these past three days shows the comparison between the Cossack in the folktale and our intellectual-activist Cossacks was not misplaced.

But as I said, we live in a democracy with plural voices. Freedom of speech is integral to our liberty. And the right of Narendra Modi's critics to make fools of themselves is their inalienable right.

Do let me know what you think.

India awaits NaMo

The juggernaut moves on

The venerable Economist has finally taken note of what is common knowledge in India: Gujarat is racing ahead of the rest of the country. The credit for Gujarat's booming prosperity which has benefited all communities (Muslims included, lest the point be missed or lost in the cacophony of Left-liberal rant)should go to Gujarati entrepreneurship and Chief Minister Narendra Modi's visionary leadership.

Here are two telling excerpts from the report, headlined "India's Guangdong",published in the latest issue of the Economist:

These days Gujarat accounts for 5% of India’s population but 16% of its industrial output and 22% of its exports. Its growth has outpaced India’s (see chart) and it wins accolades from business people. A recent comparison of Indian states by McKinsey, a consultancy, waxed lyrical about Gujarat. It might yet play the role of industrial locomotive for the country, as Guangdong province did for China in the 1990s. There is lots of excited talk about exporters switching from China to India...

Gujarat could be a vision of India’s future, in which manufacturing flourishes, soaking up rural labour. Its economy is expected to grow by double digits, even as India’s rate slows to 7-8% this year...

The Congress, of course, would brush aside the Economist's assessment, insisting 'poverty in an entitlement-driven India is better than prosperity in a entrepreneurship-driven Gujarat'. Recall how the party and its pseudo-secular drum-beaters, among them the Left-liberal intelligentsia and the intellectually bankrupt Delhi Commentariat, once argued that 'corruption is better than BJP' while propping up the Jungle Raj of Laloo Prasad Yadav in Bihar.

I can almost hear Teesta Setalvad and Arundhati Roy ranting -- the first in television studio debates which increasingly look like WWF matches, the second through 10,000-word essays in Outlook and Frontline -- that it's all a Right-wing conspiracy. What would the poor (and I don't mean so literally) sods do if India were to say goodbye to all that is wretched with our economy, and hence our society and polity?

[Narendra Modi at India Today Conclave 2011. Watch 2:44 onwards.]

It's a pity that the Delhi4 are yet to recognise what the world has begun to hail as India's biggest (and only) success story since 2004: NaMo's leadership and its consequent bounty of riches for Gujarat. And reconcile themselves with the reality. But then again, D4's reading habits are restricted to Times of India, possibly Hindustan Times, and Dainik Jagran. These publications provide stimulating fodder for their addled minds.

Meanwhile, our 'economist' Prime Minister should check out the latest issue of the Economist for a reality check on which way is India headed under the NAC's tutelage and which way is Gujarat headed under NaMo's leadership.

[Also see 'Gujarat shows astounding growth in female literacy': NaMo leads from the front to educate the girl child. By Ashiya Parveen.]

For CBI, slander is evidence!

Real target of Congress' Goebbelsian propaganda is Narendra Modi!

There have been more than 5,000 ‘encounter deaths’ in this country. Over 1,700 ‘encounter death’-related complaints are pending in various courts and before the Human Rights Commission. More than 800 ‘encounter deaths’ took place in the last few decades in Uttar Pradesh alone. More than 400 police ‘encounters’ took place in Maharashtra. None of these (incidents) has come to trial as has the Sohrabuddin case. We have never heard that anyone has been convicted for these thousands of ‘encounter deaths’. No policemen have been found guilty or even arrested as it has happened in Gujarat,” says Mr Devang Nanavati, an Ahmedabad-based lawyer who is associated with the BJP, while highlighting the strange obsession with which the death of a notorious criminal who had a mile-long record of serious crimes and whose links with Dawood Ibrahim qualified him as a terror accomplice, is being pursued by the Congress, the Central Bureau of Investigation, congenital liars who pose as human rights activists and a corrosive media which has lost all sense of balance and fair play.

The Supreme Court, which asked the CBI to inquire into the ‘larger conspiracy’ behind the killing of Sohrabuddin Shaikh and his wife, Kauser Bi, nearly five years after the incident had occurred, was no doubt motivated by the noble intention of getting to the truth. However, such lofty intentions need not necessarily be attributed to the sustained pressure from the slain criminal’s apparently inconsolable brother and jholawallahs who would be rendered jobless (and thus find themselves starved of generous funding by a variety of sources and agencies) if society were to be cleansed of malcontent, to punish those responsible for what they allege to be extrajudicial killings carried out by the police on the instructions of BJP leaders. Their pre-determination of guilt, both by implication and association, which finds more than an echo in what the CBI now alleges through stories which are touted as ‘investigative journalism’ by newspapers and news channels whose bias renders them incapable of distinguishing between fact and fiction, cannot be allowed to supplant the judicial process.

Events over the past fortnight have removed all doubts, if there were any, about the CBI’s motives that are anything but lofty. The agency has been most brazen while pursuing a political agenda set by the Congress to defame Chief Minister Narendra Modi through slander and worse with the sole purpose of tarring his reputation and hobbling his Government to a point where it begins to lose credibility among Gujarat’s voters. For, the real target of the Goebbelsian propaganda orchestrated by the Congress with the help of the CBI and a craven media is not Mr Amit Shah, who has resigned as Minister of State for Home after being charged with murder, extortion and obstruction of justice in the Sohrabuddin ‘false’ encounter case and is currently in jail. It is Mr Modi — his invincibility is being sought to be weakened. At the national level, the purpose is to force the BJP on the back foot and tie it down to answering allegations instead of leading a robust campaign to oust the Congress from power.

The use of manufactured taint to stun and paralyse political foes is nothing new for the Congress; it’s a past master at the game of misusing agencies of the state, most notably the Intelligence Bureau and the CBI, to further its political interests. When the Congress needed to put down the Raja of Amethi Sanjay Singh after he fell out with Rajiv Gandhi, it used the CBI, which was inquiring into the murder of badminton champion Syed Modi in 1988, to plant salacious stories in newspapers — there were no 24x7 news channels those days — eager to oblige the party. ‘Excerpts’ from what was alleged to be the personal diary of Syed Modi’s widow, Amita, found their way into the front page of these newspapers day after day, suitably embellished with insinuations and slanderous concoctions attributed to ‘sources’ in the CBI. Public memory being proverbially short, few people would remember today that the charges against Mr Sanjay Singh and Ms Amita Modi did not stick — the courts contemptuously threw them out. Twenty-one years later, the CBI quietly closed the case, having failed to establish the ‘larger conspiracy’ behind Syed Modi’s murder which, not surprisingly, it had claimed to have established in 1988-89.

Nor would too many people remember the so-called ‘St Kitts scandal’ that was manufactured by the Congress with the help of an obliging CBI to embarrass VP Singh and divert attention from the Bofors bribery scandal in 1989. An elaborate exercise was undertaken to forge documents to allege that VP Singh was a beneficiary of his son Ajeya’s ‘offshore account’ in First Trust Corp, a little-known bank in St Kitts of which nobody had heard till then. The forged documents showed that the account contained $ 21 million. Once again, eager-to-oblige newspapers published the bogus story and the Congress’s dirty tricks department had a field day painting VP Singh in the most lurid of colours, pronouncing him as a villain who was not quite the knight in shining armour that people thought he was. In the end, of course, the forgery was exposed, the conspiracy to defame VP Singh unravelled and the Congress lost the general election. Similarly, the Congress had tried to frame Mr LK Advani in the so-called ‘hawala case’ on the eve of the general election in 1996. Not only did the Congress lose that election but Mr Advani — and the BJP — emerged stronger from that attempt to sully his and the party’s image.

Examples of the Congress misusing the CBI abound. It is no secret that after the UPA came to power in the summer of 2004, the agency not only ensured Ottavio Quattrocchi remained at a safe distance from India where he was wanted to stand trial in the Bofors bribery case in which he was the prime accused, but also facilitated the emptying of the London bank accounts where the bribe money had been parked by the Italian middleman. Subsequently, the case was ‘closed’, much to the relief of a Prime Minister who actually believed prosecuting those behind the Bofors scandal was “a shame”. We also know how the CBI’s investigations into the disproportionate assets cases against Ms Mayawati and Mr Mulayam Singh Yadav are used to secure their support for the Government at moments of crisis.

In the Sohrabuddin ‘false’ encounter case, the CBI is back to using its old trick of planting stories about ‘evidence’ that has been clearly concocted to suit the Congress’s insidious gameplan. The fact is, it has filed a chargesheet but has no evidence to substantiate its allegations. And so the CBI has sought more time from the Supreme Court for ‘investigation’. Doesn’t prosecution follow investigation? Or is it the other way round for the Congress Bureau of Intimidation? And is that why it wants the case transferred out of Gujarat?

[This appeared as my Sunday column, Coffee Break, in The Pioneer on August 1, 2010.]

Criminal history of Sohrabbuddin

Teesta's "secular petty criminal" was no innocent lad!

Sohrabbuddin was not an ordinary criminal as projected by the petitioner in the alleged encounter case. Sohrabuddin had spread his tentacles in four states viz. Gujarat, Rajasthan, MP and Maharashtra. He was working in tandem with mafia dons like late Abdul Latif and Daud Ibrahim. With the active support of Dawood Ibrahim, Rasul Parti, and Mammumiya Panjumia, he was continuously smuggling in dangerous weapons and other contraband from Pakistan. In one case alone, detected by the DCB crime branch of Ahmedabad, 24 AK-56 rifles, 27 Hand grenades, 5250 cartridges and 81 magazines were recovered from one of his family owned property in Madhya Pradesh.

The details of Sohrabbuddin’s offences registered in different states are as under.

GUJARAT :
(1) DCB PS Ahmedabad CR No.11/94:
In this case, after the demolition of Babri Masjid, Sohrabbuddin and other accused had indulged in criminal conspiracy with a view to wage war against the Government of India by collecting and distributing arms and ammunition illegally and distributing them to attack during annual Lord Jagannath Rath Yatra in the year 1993 with a view to spread terror among the citizens of Ahmedabad City. After investigation, charge sheet was filed against 60 accused including Sohrabbuddin. During investigation 24 AK-56 rifles, 27 hand grenades, 5250 cartridges, 81 Magazines were recovered from the well located in the agricultural field of Sohrabbuddin. Sohrabbuddin was arrested on 9.11.1995 and was taken in police custody remand up to 9.12.1995.

(i) In this case, Sohrabbuddin along with 60 notorious accused was involved. All accused were arrested except (1) Dawood Abrahim, (2) Mammu Maiya Punju Miya (3) Farooq, (4) Ahmed (6) Sharif Khan, (7) Rasul Patti, (8) Syed Ali and seven others.
(ii) All 60 accused were tried in the Court of Designated Judge at Ahmedabad. The accused in this case were anti-national and anti-social persons having criminal antecedents and were associated with Dawood and Latif’s gang.
(iii) Number of accused who had absconded, are yet to be arrested. Amongst them are anti national criminals such as Dawood Ibrahim, Rasulkhan Party, Sharifkhan @ Dawood Shamsher. Red corner notices have been issued by Interpol for arrest of Rasul Party, Sharifkhan, Dawood Ibrahim. Dawood Ibrahim has been declared international terrorist.
(iv) It is evident that Sohrabbuddin was one of India based leader of these notorious criminals and their gangs. During investigation, Sohrabbuddin confessed to his involvement in this serious offence.
(v) The brief facts of his confession is mentioned in the judgment of this case which is as under:-
(Accused No.26: Sohrabbuddin @ Salimbhai Anvaruddin Shaikh: In his confessional statement he had stated that
he knew Sharifkhan since 1980. He came in contact with Shamim and Babukhan when he was driving a truck in Mahijpur. In March 1994 during the EID he went to meet Mahijpur to meet Shamimkhan and Sharrifkhan and met him at the residence of Shamimkhan. Sharifkhan told him that he was going to purchase one or two trucks and offered him to serve with him. Thereafter he purchased one truck. The driver Pappukhan was the younger brother of Shamimkhan and the conductor of the truck was Afzalkhan and the number of the truck was MOU-686. In may and June 1994 two trips carrying brown sugar in the truck were done by him at the instance of Sharifkhan to Bombay. In April 1994 he was told by Sharifkhan to go to Ahmedabad. He came to Ahmedabad, stayed in Ajanta Hotel in the name of Shohrab and as per the instruction of Sharifkhan, one Sattar Chacha handed over a box to him in the hotel. He brought the said box and handed over the same to Sharifkhan. The box contained 9mm pistols and cartridges. Again he came to Ahmedabad at the instance of Sharifkhan and stayed in Ajanta Hotel where one person handed over Rs. 1 lac as per the instruction issued by Sharifkhan who in turn handed over the same to Sharifkhan at Mahijpur. In June 1994 he came to Ahmedabad along with the cleaner of the truck and he stayed in Ajanta Hotel at Mirzapur. One person came to the hotel and handed over to him one box. The box contained 30 carbine guns and 100 cartridges. He in turn handed over the said box to Ajjukhan who was an accomplice of Sharifkhan and who went to Mahijpur with the box in the truck. He himself went to Mahijpur by train. In July 1994 he again came to Ahmedabad at the instance of Sharifkhan. Sharifkhan had told him that silver belonging to him was lying in Ahmedabad and therefore he was instructed to come to Ahmedabad along with Shamim Pappukhan the driver and Afzal the conductor. He went to Ahmedabad in Truck No.MOU-686. Pappu and Afzal had gone to one factory for the purpose of unloading the goods while he himself and Shamim dropped down at Kathwada and then they came to Astodia. He stayed in Hotel Ajanta. Sharifkhan had given him three currency notes of Rs. 100/- denomination and told them that if the notes were shown to the persons approaching them then he would talk with them. Thereafter he had a talk with Sharifkhan on telephone at Mahijpur. He gave the instruction to change the Hotel. Shamim was asked to stay in Hotel Ajanta while he went to stay in A-1 Guest House near Railway Station and stayed there. Thereafter he contacted Sharifkhan on telephone from A-1 Guest House and on next day at 4.00 p.m., two persons came to the guest house. He had shown the currency notes which were given by Sharifkhan. Thereafter as per their previously hatched plan, he followed the two persons in the auto rickshaw and the persons who came to the guest house followed them on Yamaha. Thereafter they went to the Amardeep Transport where Pappu, the driver of the truck, met him and informed him that the truck was loaded. Thereafter he, Shamim, Afzal and one unknown person followed the Yamaha motor cycle in a truck. The truck was taken near one mosque at Vatva. Thereafter, the persons who came on Yamaha motor cycle requested them to wait. At about 10.00 p.m., three pardanashin ladies came in the Maruti van with three persons including two persons who came on Yamaha. The name of one of the lady was Zarina. The Maruti Van was parked near the truck and the box lying in the Maruti van was loaded on to the truck. Thus, nine long boxes were loaded in the truck. Thereafter, he sat near the driver’s seat with Pappu and went to Mahijipur. Sharifkhan in the mean while managed one truck bearing No. MP-14-B-9177 Tata 1210 LP. The weapons were subsequently shifted in the said truck with help of Afzal and Shamim. It contained 32 AK-56 rifles, cartridges and magazines. The transfer of weapons was made near the pond situated at some distance from Mahijpur. Sharifkhan thereafter told him to keep the weapons at his residence for some days. During the night hours the weapons were kept in the back portion of his house. On the next day he purchased four containers and the weapons were put in the containers and few of them were buried. Sharifkhan, in the month of October-November, came in Maruti Van bearing No. DL-2-8224 and they met at the house of Shamim and at that time Afzal informed that some persons have come from Gujarat and they were interrogating Pappukhan at Malva Transport. In December, January and as well as in February he stayed in Ahmedabad. Salim and Rafiq RD came in Maruti Car bearing No. CTK-4605. He came along with them to Zarania and thereafter they went to the well situated in his field. He had brought 4 AK-56 Rifles, 8 to 10 magazines and one box of cartridges. Then he went with them to Indore and from there he had returned to Ujjain. Subsequently he came to Ahmedabad at the instance of Sharifkhan and stayed in the house of his sister Ramzani Gandhi. Thereafter again in the month of June 1995 he went to M.P. where police came to have a search at his place. He apprehended danger and therefore to conceal weapons, he threw all the weapons in the well and bombs and cartridges were buried near the well."


The order of conviction in judgement read:-

“ The accused no.1 YUSUFKHAN ALIAS LAPLAP KHUDDADKHAN PATHAN, accused no.2 SHIRAZMIYA AKBARMIYA THAKORE, accused no.5 SAJIDALI ALIAS DENI MOHEMADALI SAIYED, accused no.13 IQBAL ALIAS BAPU SAIYEDHUSSEIN SAIYED, accused no.15 GAJNAFARKHAN ALIAS BABU MINNAKHAN PATHAN, accused no.26 SOHRABBUDDIN ALIAS SALIM ANVARUDDIN SHAIKH, accused no.32 ABDUL SATTAR ALIAS SATTAR BATTERY ABDULGANI SHAIKH accused no.33 ABDULRAOOF ALIAS RAOOF ABDULKADAR SHAIKH accused no.47 HUSSEINBHAI ALIAS BHAJIYA MOHHAMMEDBHAI PATANI and accused no.58 HUJAFARKHAN ALIAS NASHIR LUHAR UMARDARAJKHAN PATHAN are convicted for the offence punishable under sections 3 and 5 of the TADA ACT and sentenced to undergo FIVE YEARS RI under both the sections and to pay a fine of Rs.250/- each and total amount of fine to the tune of Rs.5oo/- in default to pay fine to undergo further RI of ONE MONTH EACH. They are further convicted for the offence punishable under sections 4,5, and 6 of the EXPLOSIVE SUBSTANCES ACT and sentenced to undergo FIVE YEARS RI and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- indefault topay fine to undergo further RI of ONE MONTH. They are further convicted for the offence punishable under section 7 and 25(1)(a) of the ARMS ACT and sentenced to undergo imprisonment.".

For enhancing the punishment awarded to the accused, the state government has gone in appeal which is pending before the Supreme Court.

(2) Offence registered at Vejalpur Police Station of Ahmedabad City CR-II-238/2007 under section 123 B, IPC, 25 (i), B, A of Arms Act, 135 (i) of Bombay Police Station. In this case, Sohrabbuddin @ Salim @ Samir Agrawal was arrested along with other accused. In this case, the accused indulged in criminal conspiracy to commit murder by arming themselves with weapons to extract money from a person who had failed to pay a loan taken by him. In this case, associate of Sohrabbuddin, Sharifkhan @ SK,(known as Chhota Dawood) is absconding and has taken shelter in Pakistan. Red corner notice has been issued by Interpol for arrest of Sharif Khan.

(3) Shahpur Police Station of Ahmedabad City CR No.-II-169/95 under Section 467, 468, 469, 471 of IPC under Section 25 (i), A (i), AA of Arms Act and Section 29, 1 (B3) of Explosive Act. In this case, 32 accused persons entered into a criminal conspiracy by forgery of documents to use them for obtaining No Objection Certificate with a view to obtain a license for transportation as well as purchase of prohibited pistols, revolvers and cartridges and other weapons with a view to indulge in criminal activities in the city of Ahmedabad. Sohrabbuddin was one of the accused along with other anti-national criminals like Rasul Party, Sharifkhan etc. He was charge-sheeted. Rasul khan, Ezazkhan, Sharifkhan are absconding. In this case, the Sessions court acquitted the accused. Against this acquittal, the State Government has filed appeals No. Crl. Revision Appeal. No. 285/2002 and No. 286/2002 which are pending in the High Court of Gujarat. Red corner notices has been issued for arrest of Rasul Party and Sharif Khan.

(4) Navrangpura Police Station of Ahmedabad City CR No.II-1124/04 under Section 307, 427 of IPC, Section 25(i) A. In this case, Sohrabbuddin along with 9 other accused persons had opened fire in the office of Popular Construction Ltd., and had attempted to murder with a view to intervene himself in a property dispute. In this case, all the 10 accused were arrested and chargesheeted. In this case, Shorabbuddin was also arrested. The brother of Sohrabbuddin, Niabuddin is also co-accused.

MAHARASHTRA:

(1) Chandgad Police Station of Kolhapur District CR No.52/2000 under Section 307, 120(b), 147, 148, 149 of IPC and under Section 25(i) (3), 27 of Arms Act. At that time, Sohrabbuddin was known as Sohrabbudin @ Salman @ Salim Anvaruddin Kureshi. In this case, Sohrabbuddin was involved along with 5 other accused. In this case, Sohrabbuddin was absconding and declared as such. The case has been charge sheeted in Jurisdictional Court and is pending for trial. On 8.11.2000, the accused, who were riding motor cycles, opened fire on 2 persons at Old ST Stand and injured them greviously. In this case, Sohrabbuddin along with Praful @ Tulsi @ Samir, Jalil, and Ramzan Shah were involved. In this case, accused Jalil was arrested whereas Praful and Sohrabbuddin have absconded.

(2) Chandgad Police Station of Kolhapur District Crime Registration No.4/2005 under Section 302, 120(b), 34 of IPC and under Section 25(1) (3) and 27 of Arms Act. In this case, Sohrabbuddin along with 5 other accused involved in criminal conspiracy by arming themselves with illegal weapons and killed Gopal Tukaram Badivadekar. In this case, Sohrabbuddin was arrested whereas other 5 accused had absconded. In this case, charge sheet was filed and the case is pending for trial.

MADHYA PRADESH:

1. Nagda Police Station of Ujjain District of MP Crime Registration No.237/95 under Section 122, 123 IPC and sections 25, 27 of Arms Act. In this incident Sohrabbuddin was caught while selling arms. The case was investigated by local police and C.B.I.
2. Mahidpur Police Station of Ujjain District of MP Crime Registration No.166/95 under Section 122,123 of IPC and 25 and 27 of Arms. Act. In this incident fire arms were recovered from Sohrabbuddin. The case was initially investigated by the local police and later on by C.B.I.
3. Lasudia Police Station C.R No.346/2003 under section 419 IPC in this case on 23.07.2003 Sohrabbuddin along with one Juberbhai were caught riding a motor cycle with driving licence with bogus name. They were arrested and charge sheeted along with two more persons who facilitated bogus licence.
4. On 06-07-1999 Sohrabbuddin was detained under National Security Act (N.S.A) In this case, accused were arrested and later on released on bail and since then they are absconding. Sohrabbuddin was detained under National Security Act on 5.7.1999 by Madhya Pradesh Police.

RAJASTHAN:

(1) Hathipol Police Station of Udaipur District of Rajasthan State Crime Registration No.214/04 dated 31.12.2004 under Section 147, 148, 149, 302 IPC and Section 3/25 of Arms Act. In this case, Sohrabbuddin along with other 6 accused persons formed an unlawful assembly and opened fire with fire arms and killed one Hamid Lata at a busy thoroughfare of Suraj pole in the heart of Udaipur City. These accused had come on motor cycles. In this case, 2 accused were arrested whereas other 5 accused are absconding.
The deceased was killed after he was pointed out by Sohrabbuddin. In this case, charge sheet was filed in the jurisdictional court. A reward of Rs. 2,000/- was declared on 11.1.2005 for arrest or help in arrest of Sohrabbuddin. The letter was circulated to all concerned police units of Rajasthan. As more record of criminal antecedents of Sohrabbuddin came on record, Director General of Police of Rajasthan on 27.10.2005 declared a reward of Rs. 25,000/- for the arrest or help in arrest or for assistance in use of lawful force during arrest if he resisted arrest.


Role of Sohrabuddin’s family members:

The Petitioner namely Rubabuddin and his brothers were also aware of the movement and activity of Sohrabbuddin. These facts have come on record during inquiry and investigation conducted. The details are as under:-

[1] Conduct of Rubabbudin(petitioner in Supreme Court) - The Petitioner in his writ petitions and additional writ petitions, had concealed criminal antecedents and activities of Sohrabbuddin. In no petition he has stated that his brother was terrorist and involved in serious offences deliberately to project picture of Sohrabbuddin as an innocent person, nor such details he has given to media, to whom he has given many interviews.
Sohrabbuddin was absconding after committing an offence of murder, for which an offence was registered at SurajPole police station of Udaipur District of Rajasthan in day light at a major thoroughfare. A reward of Rs. 25,000/- was also declared for his arrest or information. However, Petitioner who has constantly maintained relations with Sohrabbuddin, never informed local police station or other jurisdiction police about Sohrabbuddin during period of his absconding to save him from arrest. In fact, all acts of omission and commission of trial by media by the Petitioner are to hide his own culpable misconduct. From the signed statement of Rubabbuddin given to inquiry officer and statement given to the Investigating Officer on 3-2-2007 on 1.4.2007 and on 25.7.2007 following facts have come on record.
1. Rubabuddin provided photographs of Sohrabbuddin and Kauserbi to the Inquiry officer which is borne out by statement given by Rubbabuddin. These photographs show visit to Agra by Sohrabbuddin and Kauserbi, as in the background “Taj Mahal” is visible.
2. Rubabuddin was also aware of the movement Sohrabbuddin while on run and was actually harbouring him alongwith his brother at Jharania house. It is evident from the subsequent paras in the signed statement given to inquiry officer on 25/07/06. From his statement, following additional information and facts are revealed.
(a) Brother Niamuddin informed Rubabuddin on 23/11/05 at 05.20 hrs about Sohrabbuddin and Kauserbi going to Sangli from Hyderabad by his mobile phone.
(b) Rubabuddin was aware of mobile telephone No. of Sohrabbuddin
(c) Brother Naibuddin was aware of Seat number of bus occupied by Sohrabbuddin and Kauserbi when they went out from Hyderabad.

In the signed statement of Petitioner recorded by Inquiry Officer of this encounter case on 03/02/07, petitioner Rubabuddin has confessed and gave facts that on 16/17-11-05 in the morning Sohrabbuddin and Kauserbi had gone out of house at Jharania to go to Indore and at that time Sohrabbuddin informed him that he and Kauser will go to Hyderabad and stay with one Kalimuddin (b) Rubabuddin was informed that Sohrabbuddin would travel in maruti car owned by Kalimuddin from Indore to Hyderabad bought from previous owner Dr.Prakash Bandel. (c) Sohrabbuddin and Kauser had stayed in their joint family house at Jharania for a week.(d) Sohrabbuddin was living in Indore at Hizrabad Colony in the house of Ibrahim. (e) Sohrabbuddin was living in the house of a relative of Azam Dadhi. (f) Medical treatment records of Kauserbi of Bombay and at Indore were with him. (g) He was not aware of goods lying in the houses occupied by Sohrabbuddin. (h) Sohrabbuddin informed him on 22/11/05 on telephone that he was going out to Hyderabad for treatment of Kauser and after that he would return to Jharania. (i) List of goods of Sohrabbuddin and Kauserbi in house at Jharania was given to Inquiry Officer. (j) Sohrabbuddin and Kauserbi used to attend all religious functions and social functions of relatives by coming at Jharania. Sohrabbuddin and Kauserbi used to come frequently to the house of Rubabuddin.

[2] Conduct of Sababuddin Anwaruddin Shaikh aged 42, Advocate (Brother of Sohrabbuddin.)
Sababuddin was arrested in Nagda Police Station (M.P) C.R No. 237/95 u/s 122,123 IPC and 25-A,27 of Arms Act. The case was initially investigated by local police and later on by C.B.I which charge sheeted the case against him and other ten accused. In this case his brother Sohrabbuddin was also co-accused. Sohrabbuddin was absconding after committing day light murder in major –cross ways at Suraj Pole area of Udaipur City on 31.12.2004 and was hiding. As per statement recorded during inquiry of Sohrabbuddin encounter, on 16/17 November, 2005, Sohrabbuddin and Kauserbi were present in their house and then from his house Sohrabbuddin and Kauserbi had gone to board a bus of Nagda private travels to go to Indore. Sababuddin was also enjoying confidence of Sohrabbuddin as he has also stated in his statement that Sohrabbuddin was to stay at the house of Kalamuddin.

[3] Conduct of Niabuddin s/o Anvaruddin, aged 31 brother of Sohrabbuddin.
On 3.2.2007, Niabuddin admitted in his signed statement before Inquiry Officer of State CID Crime (Inquiring into death of Sohrabbuddin) following facts.

(1) On 16/17.11.2005, Sohrabbuddin and Kauserbi had gone from Jharania village by a private bus to Indore and while going Sohrabbuddin disclosed that he is going to meet Kalimuddin.
(2) Sohrabbuddin and Kauserbi were living at Shalimar township, Devas Road in Indore.
(3) Rubabuddin had informed that Dr. Prakash Bandel’s maruti van was used by Sohrabbuddin.
(4) Sohrabbuddin and Kauserbi stayed for one week in their house in Jharania.
(5) Earlier Sohrabbuddin was living at 111, Khijrabad Colony on rent in the house of Ibrahim.
(6) Sohrabbuddin was also living in the house of relative of Azam Dodhi in Udaipur. Sohrabbuddin and Kauserbi were living alternatively in Udaipur and Indore in above mentioned houses.
(7) Where ever Sohrabbuddin used to go, Kauserbi used to accompany him.
(8) Sohrabbuddin before going out of Hyderabad had rang him up and told him that he was taking Kauserbi for treatment to Sangli.
(9) Sohrabbuddin got married with Kauserbi in the house of Samabhai Khanjipir, Machla Magra.
The statement shows that Naiumuddin was very much aware about Sohrabbuddin’s activities, places of stay and movement. However, in spite of knowing Sohrabbuddin as an absconder and wanted by police in many cases, he never informed police station and actively harboured Sohrabbuddin. Naimuddin is also wanted in Navrangpura Police station (Ahmedabad) in CR No. 1124/04 u/s 307, 427 of IPC and section 25 of the Arms act. In this case Sohrabbuddin was also a co-accused.
[4] Conduct of Jabbunisa W/o Anvaruddin Quereshi , 60 years R/o Jharnia (Mother of Sohrabbuddin).
From the signed statement given to inquiry officer, following facts have emerged.
(1) Sohrabbuddin’s mother admitted that she had five sons. (1) Sababbuddin, (2) Sohrabbuddin, (3) Shanawajuddin (4) Rubabuddin and (5) Niabuddin.
(2) She had admitted that her son Sohrabbuddin had gone to Hyderabad and from Hyderabad he was going to Sangli by bus for treatment of Kauserbi.

From the signed statement of mother Jabbunisa and three brothers Niabuddin, Sababbuddin, and Rubabbuddin as briefly stated herein above given to the Inquiry Officer, they all have accepetd that they were aware that Sohrabbuddin was absconding and wanted in a case under sec. 302 of IPC and for whose arrest a reward of Rs. 25,000/- was declared by DGP Rajasthan, and yet they along with their family members actively harbored him violating section 216 of IPC.

[This is excerpted from a larger note sourced from official files.]

S*IT hits the fan!

Media spattered and bruised

NaMo exposes p-sec fraud

The signs of desperation are showing. After failing to bring him down despite 8 years of relentless calumny and worse, Narendra Modi’s critics have begun to hit out in blind fury.

For more than a week English language media, including news channels, based in Dilli had been reporting with gay abandon how the Special Investigation Team set up by the Supreme Court (whose remit has now come under the apex court’s review) had Modi in a twist after ‘summoning’ him in the case filed by the widow of Ehsan Jafri, former Congress MP who died in the violence that followed the slaughter of 58 Hindus when a Muslim mob set two coaches of Sabarmati Express ablaze on February 27, 2002.

The p-sec media, which has been relentless in demonising Modi using the Goebbelsian trick of repeating its toxic lies in the hope people will come to believe them, launched a coordinated tirade on Monday morning, berating the Gujarat Chief Minister for failing to turn up before the SIT. Some accused him of running scared. Others even listed the questions the SIT planned to ask Modi. Is the SIT being provided with questions drafted by p-sec journalists and activists who have lost all sense of propriety? On Monday, Teesta Setalvad went to the extent of justifying ‘extra-judicial’ measures to bring Modi to heel!

Modi, of course, has had the last laugh – as usual at the expense of p-sec media elite and their jholawallah friends. In a stunning disclosure by way of an open letter to the people of the country, he has exposed media’s calumny and casuistry.

Had I owned a newspaper, I would have run a front page banner headline:

S*IT hits the fan!

with a second deck:

Media spattered and bruised

This demonisation of Modi has had no impact on the people of Gujarat. Modi won the 2002 Assembly election with a huge margin; he repeated the feat in 2007. The people of Gujarat, both Hindus and Muslims, have moved on, Modi has moved on and the State is a shining example of what good governance can achieve by all-round inclusive development and growth. In industry, agriculture and social welfare, Gujarat leads every other State.

But media won’t give up. It is still stuck in 2002. And, like a stuck record, continues to plan the same canard again and again, accusing Modi of imaginary crimes and trying to instigate a Muslim backlash. It has not fetched the p-sec media elite any results; it won’t either.

Modi’s open letter to the nation speaks for itself. Frankly, no further comment is needed to highlight the deviousness of those who use the cover of ‘free media’ to pursue their anti-Modi agenda. What do you think?

The following is the text of Modi’s letter:

My beloved countrymen,

Namaskar!


I am constrained to write to you with a deep sense of anguish. Since last eight years, canards have been spread against me. For the past one week, if we analyse the allegations levelled against me, then the truth will become evident. Truth cannot be suppressed. It is now my duty to place before you the facts that bring out the importance of understanding what the truth really is.
After the 2002 Godhra incidents, I had categorically said in the Vidhan Sabha and in public that no one is above the Indian Constitution and the law, even if he happens to be the Chief Minister of a State. These are not mere words. My actions have reflected this statement in its true spirit. I assure you that this would be my stand in the future.
In spite of that, some vested interests, without losing a single opportunity and with malicious pleasure and without bothering to ascertain the truth based on mere whims and fancies have been tarnishing the good image of Gujarat, my Government and me.
Recently, there has been a systematic campaign to defame Gujarat through propagation of false reports titled ‘Special Investigation Team summons Narendra Modi’; ‘Narendra Modi did not appear before SIT’ and ‘Modi has shown disrespect to Supreme Court and SIT’. Such baseless allegations are being levelled once again against me to defame Gujarat.
I am therefore compelled to place the facts before my countrymen.
FACTS:
As soon as newspapers began reporting that Modi has been summoned by the SIT, the Government spokesperson immediately said that Shri Modi is bound by the law of the land and the Indian Constitution. He has always extended his cooperation to every procedure of law. And he is committed to do so in the future.
It is a matter of grave concern and needs investigation as to why and who started spreading lies that ‘SIT summons Narendra Modi on March 21, 2010’.
The purveyors of untruth failed even to think that March 21, 2010 happens to be a Sunday and a public holiday.
These purveyors of lies even did not once bother to check whether the key SIT officers, who are appointed by the Supreme Court, were present in Gujarat on March 21, 2010.
SIT had not fixed March 21, 2010 for my appearance. To say that I was summoned on March 21 is completely false. I shall respond to the SIT fully respecting the law and keeping in view the dignity of a body appointed by the Supreme Court.
The date of March 21, 2010 was invented by some vested interest and as a part of their effort to interfere in the due process of law. They wanted to paint me as a person who refused to respond to the SIT. This country has in the last twenty four hours witnessed a campaign of disinformation in which a section of the media became an instrument of the disinformers. I hope this section will now take corrective steps.
My beloved countrymen,
The people of Gujarat and this country have identified those who are defaming Gujarat continuously since 2002. But I want to tell the truth that spreading falsehoods has only one single purpose and that is to instigate people. It is a sinful action which will harm the working of a democratic state. Seen in the backdrop of events in the last 24 hours, it shows that there is a nexus among the vested interests in spreading lies against me in order to defame me. This machination has come unstuck and the people have seen through this charade.
The Government of Gujarat has always honoured and cooperated with the investigative agencies, commissions and the Supreme Court looking into Godhra and post-Godhra incidents. And that is why I never thought of giving a public statement on this issue. Despite unbearable pain, I decided to maintain silence in the belief that the due process of law would take its own course.
But now, as the lies reach a crescendo as never before, I am compelled to bring the facts before the countrymen. I also consider it my humble duty.
I hope the truth is not twisted by the purveyors of untruth to misguide the investigation. And I expect that the media would bring my deep pain and despair to the notice of the people.
Thanks,

(Narendra Modi)

Modi is the future. Dilli4 is the past.

It’s been a great Monday for the BJP and the larger ideological Parivar. In Gujarat, the BJP has won five of the seven Assembly seats where byelections were held on September 12. All five -- Jasdan, Chotila, Dehgam, Danta and Sami-Hariz – were held by the Congress; these are traditional strongholds of the party. Jasdan has been with the Congress since the first general election. Congress has retained Dhoraji. BJP has lost Kodinar.

The byelections have changed the configuration of the 182-member Gujarat Assembly: BJP – 122; Congress – 54; Others – six. That’s three short of what Chief Minister Narendra Modi had aimed to achieve in the 2007 Assembly poll.

In Madhya Pradesh, the BJP has wrested the Tendukheda seat from the Congress. It was considered a stronghold of State Congress president Suresh Pachauri. The Congress has retained Gohad. In the 230-member Madhya Pradesh Assembly, the configuration changes marginally: BJP –144; Congress – 69; BSP – 7; BJSP – 5; Others – four. One seat is vacant.

In Uttarakhand, the BJP has won the Vikasnagar seat, albeit by a wafer-thin margin. This gives the BJP a simple majority of 36 in the 70-member State Assembly.

[The ABVP has swept the MS University, Baroda, election. To get an idea why this is important, please read Defiling Christ is not art]

The most significant results, of course, are from Gujarat. In this summer’s Lok Sabha poll, the BJP won 15 of the 26 seats in this State; the remaining went to the Congress. Subsequently, the party lost the Junagadh Municipal Corporation election which was touted as ‘mainstream’ media as clinching evidence of Modi’s ‘declining popularity’. Some were bold enough to declare that the ‘Modi story is over’.

Not quite. People in the constituencies won on Monday had voted for Congress in 2007 and then again in the 2009 Lok Sabha poll. They have now voted BJP. Modi says the people have seen through the Congress in 100 days of UPA Government. Congress spokesman Abhishek Singhvi has predictably waved away the results as inconsequential. Had the Congress won, austerity be damned, champagne would have been uncorked. Arun Jaitley says it was imprudent of the Congress to “sympathise with Ishrat Jahan and her accomplices” killed in a police encounter in 2004 on election eve. Reminds me of Sonia Gandhi’s “maut ke saudagar” speech during the 2007 Assembly election.

Modi, however, needs to figure out what went wrong in Kodinar. After all, the MLA who vacated the seat was elected to the Lok Sabha on a BJP ticket from the same constituency. Was it choice of candidate? Or was it poor arithmetic in terms of local party equations?

Some conclusions that can be drawn from Monday’s results:

. BJP still remains popular at the State level. Narendra Modi and Shivraj Singh Chouhan command support and endorsement.
. Modi has reaffirmed his ability to fight back odds, imagined and real. He has demonstrated that he can finesse the Congress in elections. (In this round he didn’t even campaign, though he personally strategised every move.)
. People who voted Congress in LS poll have voted BJP in State elections.
. Endorsement of BJP State leadership highlights rejection of party’s national leadership as it exists.
. Dilli4 can’t claim any credit for Monday’s spectacular win. They had no role (and thankfully so!).

In a sense, Monday’s results have once again proved that Modi is the future. Gujarat understands this better than the BJP’s central leaders do. Will the eventual waning of Dilli4’s clout lead to realisation that the choice for the party is clear? Or will I-shall-grab-all ‘leaders’ have their way once again?

What do you think?

PM’s intolerable moralising

Kanchan Gupta / Comment / May 9, 2009.

Manmohan Singh persists with his sanctimonious, self-righteous and intolerably smug pronouncements although his sententiousness increasingly rings hollow. One comment of the Prime Minister stands out for its sheer duplicity in the waffle that was billed as an exclusive interview by the Hindustan Times last week. It first pertains to India being shamed before the world on account of the riots that occurred in Gujarat in 2002.
“The image of India took a beating when the BJP tried to impose a monolithic view on the entire country. If people with extremist and bigoted views come to power, India’s image as a great, liberal, plural and secular democracy will be hurt,” Mr Singh told the newspaper. Such high falutin statements would no doubt impress those who can see nothing wrong with the Congress and a Prime Minister who has cravenly served the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty instead of performing his prime ministerial duties. Public memory being notoriously short, many would fail to recall the Congress’s innumerable sins of omission and commission. Those who came of age this general election would know even less about the Congress’s tainted past.
But since Mr Singh has chosen to raise the issue of “the image of India” taking “a beating”, it would be in order to record that the nation’s image has suffered far worse when the Congress has been in power. If the shine was lost when the BJP was in power — as the Prime Minister claims it was — it hasn’t exactly been restored with him at the helm of the UPA Government. We shall come to this later.
The violence in Gujarat was not, contrary to Mr Singh’s mumbo-jumbo, triggered by the BJP trying to “impose a monolithic view on the entire country”. That’s nothing but a crass attempt to re-write history, something in which the Congress excels, along with its admirers in the Left. The riots followed the torching of two bogeys of the Sabarmati Express, in which Hindu pilgrims were travelling, by a Muslim mob at Godhra on February 27, 2002. In the blaze 58 people were killed — 23 men, 15 women and 20 children. According to a statement made by Mr Singh’s Government in the Rajya Sabha, 790 Muslims and 254 Hindus died in the subsequent rioting; 223 people were reported ‘missing’ and 2,548 sustained injuries. Clearly this wasn’t about the BJP “imposing a monolithic view on the entire country”.
If India’s image “took a beating”, as Mr Singh says it did, it was on account of the lies that were forged in the laboratory of neo-Goebbelsian propaganda owned by Teesta Setalvad and publicised as facts by the Congress and its drum-beaters in the media. Horror stories of murder, rape and pillage were put out that have now been found to be untrue. The report of the Special Investigation Team, set up by the Supreme Court, details instances of these lies. The Prime Minister has surely read the report, which, among other things, mentions how identical statements were prepared by Teesta Setalvad and ‘eyewitnesses’ were bullied into signing them. If India stands shamed, it is on account of amoral politicians and crafty activists slyly suppressing facts and manufacturing lies.
And, if the post-Godhra violence, in which both Muslims and Hindus died, resulted in India’s image taking a beating, then the nation’s image was tarnished beyond repair by the numerous riots since 1947 that resulted in thousands of deaths in States ruled by the Congress. We could go back to the distant past and recall the several riots that occurred in Gujarat when the Congress was in power and in which the death toll surpassed that of 2002.
Or we could go back to 1989 when the Congress Government in Bihar did nothing to quell the Bhagalpur riots in which, according to official figures, 1,070 people were killed and 524 injured. For the benefit of Mr Singh, it should also be recalled that 11,500 houses were destroyed, displacing 48,000 people, in those riots that couldn’t have enhanced, by his own logic, India’s image. Mr Lalu Prasad Yadav, who subsequently came to power in Bihar, did nothing to prosecute the guilty or follow-up on eyewitness accounts; that task has now been taken up by the JD(U)-BJP Government. Mr Yadav, as we all know, is a senior Cabinet colleague of Mr Singh. Interestingly, participating in a parliamentary debate soon after the Bhagalpur riots, Mr Yadav had squarely blamed the Congress for the terrible blood-letting. “It is the Congress that has engineered most of the riots,” he had thundered. Of course, he wouldn’t recall that speech today.
We could also recall the Nellie massacre of February 18, 1983 in which 2,191 men, women and children, some of them suckling infants, were slain in cold blood. Doubts still persist about the actual death toll; survivors insist at least 5,000 people perished in that pre-dawn slaughter. That carnage could have been averted had Mrs Indira Gandhi, of whom Mr Singh no doubt cherishes fond memories, not insisted upon holding a bogus Assembly election amid the anti-foreigners’ agitation because she wanted the incumbent Congress Government in Assam to continue to remain in power. Nellie could not have given India a good name.
Mr Singh feigns amnesia, but he needs to be told that India did not quite come out smelling of roses after the 1984 pogrom in which more than 4,000 Sikhs were brutally murdered by Congress hoodlums led by those whom the party now lists as its ‘leaders’ and rewards them with tickets to contest parliamentary elections. Twenty-five years later, the victims still wait for justice. As do those who survived the Maliana massacre. Surely Mr Singh has heard of it?
And what about India’s image taking a beating because its Prime Minister brazenly defends the decision to exonerate a wanted Italian fugitive, Ottavio Quattrocchi, who has looted this country? When the story broke, the Prime Minister’s Office pretended that it had no knowledge of the CBI asking Interpol to remove the Red Corner Notice against Quattrocchi. But the vigour with which he now defends that decision suggests he couldn't have been unaware of it. “The Quattrocchi case was an embarrassment for the Government of India,” Mr Singh says, adding, it did “not show the Indian legal system in good light”. No, Prime Minister, the decision of your Government to let Quattrocchi walk free with his ill-gotten wealth is an embarrassment for India; it does not show you and your Government in a “good light”, nor does it do wonders for the image of India.
More importantly, the Prime Minister’s timid acquiescence to the subversion of the criminal justice system and abuse of power can only fetch contempt and ridicule for India. With such a person in office, everything is possible — from fixing telecom policy to milking the exchequer; from being dictated foreign policy to letting terrorists have a free run of the country. It makes us look like a banana republic.
Yet Mr Singh waxes eloquent on India’s image!

Modi, Gujarat's lion heart!

Modi, Gujarat's lion heart

Narendra Modi meets a victim of post-Godhra violence

Not many years ago, the tree-lined road from Ahmedabad to Gandhinagar passed through vast stretches of fields and bush, the air redolent with the fragrance of wild flowers. It's no longer so. The traffic has increased and on both sides of the road huge information technology centres have come up, their gleaming chrome and glass structures reflecting the upbeat mood in the State. I am told land on either side of the road is now prized property with entrepreneurs tripping over each other to get a slice before all of it is gone.
Gandhinagar is a somnolent town, a sprawling colony, really, of squat apartment buildings, red brick bungalows and broad avenues with bright yellow flowers tumbling all over the pavements. There's no mad traffic, no jaywalkers and no piles of festering garbage. Most remarkably, there are no plastic bags -- that ubiquitous symbol of urban decay across the country -- littering the streets, the pavements, the parks and the vacant plots. Gandhinagar, largely inhabited by Ministers and bureaucrats, is stunningly neat and tidy and vastly different from crowded Ahmedabad. We head for the Chief Minister's residence.
The security arrangements are elaborate. As the car enters the Chief Minister's residence, I catch a brief glimpse of the nameplate. It's in Devnagari script and says, in large silver letters, Narendra Modi. In Gujarat (as also in the rest of the country) that's introduction enough. The house and the garden bear witness to Mr Modi's Spartan lifestyle. Frugality is writ large on the furniture, the peeling paint on the walls and in the sparsely furnished, severely austere office. It's Saturday, the day before results of the Assembly election are to be announced.
Mr Modi, of course, is relaxed. "It won't be less than 120. It could be more than that," he tells me. We talk about politics, the campaign, his famous proxy spat with Soniaben, and his plans for Gujarat. This is a different Narendra Modi, one whom I got to know well during the time he was exiled to Delhi, a victim of Gujarat's eternal politics of dissent and factionalism.
It was 1996. Mr Shankersinh Vaghela had almost managed to topple Keshubhai Patel's Government with the help of 'dissidents' whom he had taken for an extended holiday to Khajuraho. The loyalists immediately branded them as 'Khajurias'. Mr Vaghela's men responded by labelling the loyalists 'Hajurias'. The revolt was quelled by making Mr Suresh Mehta the Chief Minister; he has since turned a dissident and walked out of the party. Mr Modi was packed off to Delhi.
On a lazy afternoon at 11 Ashoka Road, I asked Mr Modi whether he was upset over the way events had unfolded despite being a 'Hajuria'. He cackled and then said, "You see, there's a third category, that of 'Majurias'. I belong to this category." What he meant was that so long he had an assignment, he was happy doing whatever the party asked him to do. And he did it with full gusto.
It's the same spirit that drives him as Chief Minister of Gujarat. "I am still a 'Majuria'," he says as I get up to leave, and hugs me warmly. At no point during our conversation does he sound cynical. His optimism is infectious.
The celebrations on Sunday outside the BJP office in Ahmedabad and the genuinely joyous welcome accorded to Mr Modi by a mammoth crowd cramming the narrow street when he arrived after the final results had been declared reminded me of cinematic representations of Caesar's triumphant return to Rome after a victorious campaign. As I wrote in my despatch that appeared in this newspaper, thousands of men, women and children were delirious with joy.
This was vastly different from the racket created by hired crowds that we usually get to see. Mr Modi's popularity is absolutely stunning. You have to see it to believe it. Television footage and newspaper reports do not do him justice. Images and words cannot capture the mass adulation he commands. Every word, every gesture, every pause and every flick of the finger fetches a roaring response. He strides the State's political stage as a giant, a man much larger and bigger than what he is in real life. The Gujarati idiom, 'Chhappan ni Chhati', which means lion-heart and literally translates into "56-inch chest", aptly describes Mr Modi's public persona.
The many myths surrounding him, myths that have become a part of Gujarat's folklore, bolster his mass appeal. Chatting with friends in the evening, I learned various things about Mr Modi. He doesn't sleep. How do they know? A raja who is mindful of his praja's welfare and follows raj dharma stays awake all the time. Mr Modi follows raj dharma, he is an ideal raja who thinks of nothing but his praja's welfare. So, he is awake all the time. Another version has it that Mr Modi gets up at 3 am in the morning and starts working.
A friend's wife breathlessly informs me that Mr Modi, a bachelor, is a vegetarian (which he is), he practices yoga (which he probably does) and he has no family (yes, he lives alone). What more can you ask for? According to an extended version of this revealing insight, Mr Modi's mother sits with the crowds at his rallies and he does not even acknowledge her presence. A second version adds details about how he has scrupulously avoided helping his siblings despite holding such a high office. A third version mentions that at Mr Modi's ancestral home, his folks use moulded plastic furniture. The waiter at the hotel restaurant told me that the ground shakes when Mr Modi walks, so he walks slowly. This is not just adulation, but veneration. There's nothing false about it; it is genuine love and affection bordering on unquestioning adoration. Few politicians, if any at all, can claim as much. This can only make Mr Modi's task that much tougher.
I am personally curious about who was manipulating the satta bazaar which went on a roller-coaster ride during the last 72 hours before the results were declared. In the early stages of the campaign, the odds were heavily stacked against the Congress and most people were putting their money on the BJP. After exit polls suggested the Congress was on a comeback trail following the first round of voting, the odds were evenly balanced. The second round of exit polls, which gave Mr Modi a narrow victory margin, saw the odds tilting against the BJP. In the last 72 hours, there was heavy betting with punters putting their money on a Congress win. Newspaper estimates suggest that the bets amounted to Rs 2,400-crore. In the event, those who placed their money on the Congress lost heavily. Some people, though, have made a killing.