The bodies of Godhra victims were displayed in public

FACT: The Godhra carnage occurred on 27 February 2002 at 8 AM, when the Sabarmati Express train was returning from Ayodhya to Ahmedabad. After that, the bodies of the karsevaks killed in Godhra were brought to Ahmedabad. This was also necessary, because most of the killed karsevaks were from Ahmedabad and keeping the bodies in Godhra could have inflamed the situation there and Godhra was also under curfew. It would have been very inconvenient for relatives to come to Godhra which was under curfew! So, it was necessary to get the bodies out of Godhra as soon as possible.

The Supreme Court-appointed SIT said that the decision to bring the kar sevaks’ bodies to Ahmedabad was a sane and proper decision. Number one, the Sola hospital where the bodies were brought was on the outskirts of Ahmedabad city, the Godhra hospital had no facilities for DNA or other tests and, most importantly, most of the kar sevaks were from Ahmedabad and the train was returning to Ahmedabad, and hence it was not an option not to bring the bodies and hand them over to families in Ahmedabad.

Also, note that if the bodies had not been brought to Ahmedabad and been kept in Godhra and retaliation taken place in Godhra, political opponents and activists would have claimed that “Modi deliberately kept the bodies in a communally-charged Godhra so as to instigate Hindus to retaliate in Godhra and did not bring them to Ahmedabad though the relatives and victims were from Ahmedabad, and the passengers were returning to Ahmedabad”. It was plain common sense to bring the bodies to Ahmedabad. While bringing the bodies to Ahmedabad, care was taken to bring the bodies after midnight in a very somber atmosphere.

The bodies were brought to Western Ahmedabad’s isolated Sola Civil Hospital, where the Muslim population was negligible. Had the government wanted to instigate Hindus, it would have brought the bodies to Eastern Ahmedabad’s main civil hospital where most of the killed karsevaks resided and from where it would have been ideal to instigate violence against Muslims.  The bodies were brought at 3:30 a.m. of 28th February in a sombre atmosphere (as reported by India Today dated 18 March 2002 and Times of India online on 28th February). The time 3:30 a.m. is very difficult or impossible to instigate riots with most people asleep and is also very inconvenient for the relatives. Had the government wanted to, it would have brought the bodies at 2 p.m. or 12 noon, which would have been convenient for relatives and easy to instigate riots. The government, thus, seems to have done 4 things right which are:

1.  Bringing the bodies to Ahmedabad instead of keeping them in Godhra so as to calm matters in Godhra and for relatives’ convenience.

2.  Bringing them to Ahmedabad at 3:30 am instead of in day-time so that chances of retaliation were negligible.

3.  Bringing them in a sober atmosphere instead of ceremonial procession.

4.  Bringing them to Western Ahmedabad’s hospital where the Muslim population was negligible instead of Eastern Ahmedabad.

The transport of these 54 bodies (4 had been identified and handed over in Godhra) was done inside five (5) closed trucks, and no one could see them, and it was also done from 11:30 pm – 12 midnight to 3:30 am, from Godhra to Ahmedabad per the report of the SIT which was appointed and monitored by the Supreme Court.

Even after coming to Western Ahmedabad’s isolated hospital, care was taken to send the bodies to the crematoriums (those which were not cremated at the hospital itself, 19 had been cremated at the hospital itself) in vehicles, not visible to anyone, while this could have been done on foot as well. This shows the sincerity of the government in preventing display of the bodies. The SIT appointed by the Supreme Court has said all this in its closure report on page 63 as well. The SIT has also said that the decision to bring the bodies was a collective one, taken by many Ministers, and with knowledge and consent of officials like the then Collector of Godhra, the Police Commissioner of Ahmedabad, the DGP of Gujarat, etc.

Despite this, several people  have tried to spread outrageous lies that ‘the dead bodies were paraded by the Government’. The mainstream media has largely not told the truth of all the above facts to clarify things. As a result, many infuriated people continue to believe the lie that the bodies were ‘paraded’. Lies have also been tried to be spread that the then Collector of Godhra, Smt. Jayanti Ravi was against bringing of the bodies to Ahmedabad. The SIT report says on page 64: “The allegation that the dead bodies were transported to Ahmedabad against the wishes of Smt. Jayanti Ravi is proved to be incorrect.” and SIT says that she had infact supported bringing of the bodies to Ahmedabad. Narendra Modi in fact revealed that Jayanti Ravi had, on the contrary, insisted that the bodies be moved away from Godhra to ease the tension.

Despite this, several people have lied on this even after the SIT report became public in May 2012. (E.g. Gujarat Congress leader Shaktisinh Gohil repeated this lie on Live National TV on 10 August 2013 in a debate with BJP’s Meenakshi Lekhi on India News TV Channel in the 8-9 pm show. See this video, time 35:26 to 35:56. Gohil also made numerous other false claims in that debate, e.g. claiming that ‘no riots took place in Gujarat for 3 days after 27 February 2002, and they started only after 3 days’, while in reality they ended within 3 days, starting on a large scale the very next day after Godhra, on 28 February. See time 35:56 to 36:32. Also see 13:47 to 14:12)

Besides, bringing bodies to Ahmedabad did not have the slightest impact on the riots. Bodies were brought after midnight on 27 February i.e. at 3:30 am of 28 February in Western Ahmedabad’s isolated Sola hospital (as reported by weekly India Today dated 18 March 2002 and Times of India online on 28 Feb 2002) while the riots began on 28 Feb at 11 AM and took place in far-off places like Naroda Patiya and Chamanpura (Ehsan Jafri case). And what about the riots that occurred OUTSIDE Ahmedabad- in Vadodara, Rajkot and 40 other villages and towns in the first 3 days? Did they also occur because bodies were brought to Ahmedabad from Godhra at 3:30 am on 28 Feb? How stupid, absurd and far-fetched is the allegation, that riots took place because bodies of the victims were brought to Ahmedabad from Godhra!

Far from the bodies being displayed publicly or ‘paraded’, extra care was taken by the Government to prevent display of the dead bodies. They were brought from Godhra to Ahmedabad inside closed trucks between 11:30 pm to 3:30 am, not visible to anyone. And even after that, the non-cremated bodies were taken to the crematoriums in closed vehicles, not visible to anyone outside.

    The Supreme Court of India in its verdict on 24 June 2022 said (on pages 149-151 of its judgment): 

   “As regards the allegation regarding dead bodies having been paraded, the same has been fully enquired into and the SIT was of the opinion that no such event of parading had occurred at any place…There is not even a tittle of material to indicate that the bodies were taken in open vehicles or so to say, paraded from Godhra to Ahmedabad or anywhere else by any group of private persons before cremation…. It was also decided to take the dead bodies during night time under police protection to avoid any untoward situation. Such being the material on record, the argument regarding the bodies being paraded, much less as a part of larger conspiracy at the highest level, is preposterous.”

   More details of this issue are given comprehensively in the book, but not in this website. A special chapter on the SIT report is also in the book, which reveals the whole truth and the SIT’s observations.

Copyright © Gujaratriots.com

Myth

Ehsan Jafri called Narendra Modi during the riots

FACT: This is absolutely untrue, and a lie concocted much after the riots. No such charge was made during the actual time of the riots in 2002, nor for many months later. The SIT report says on pages 261-262 that there is NO RECORD of any call made to Narendra Modi by Ehsan Jafri.

The following is some part of Arundhati Roy’s article in weekly Outlook dated 6 May 2002 on the Ehsan Jafri case:

“…A mob surrounded the house of former Congress MP Iqbal Ehsan Jaffri. His phone calls to the Director-General of Police, the Police Commissioner, the Chief Secretary, the Additional Chief Secretary (Home) were ignored. [Our comment: Notice how in this article, as late as May 2002, even Arundhati Roy does not claim that Jafri called Modi! All these claims of calls to the Police Commissioner, Chief Secretary are false. The SIT examined call records of the Police Commissioner P C Pandey and found that no call was made by Jafri, though Pandey made/received 302 calls on that day, i.e. 28 February 2002. And that day, the Chief Secretary G Subbarao was abroad, out of India on leave as stated in the SIT report, on page 312! But even Roy doesn’t name Modi!] The mobile police vans around his house did not intervene. The mob broke into the house. They stripped his daughters and burned them alive. Then they beheaded Ehsan Jaffri and dismembered him. Of course it’s only a coincidence that Jaffri was a trenchant critic of Gujarat Chief Minister, Narendra Modi, during his campaign for the Rajkot Assembly by-election in February…”

This is a credibility-less article by Arundhati Roy, claiming that Jafri’s daughters were raped. His son T A Jafri clarified that his sisters were safe in USA and this exposed the truth. We also dealt with this in Myth 11. But even in such an article full of factual errors, even Roy does not claim that Jafri called the then Chief Minister Narendra Modi.

In fact, Congress ally the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind alleged in August 2003 that Jafri had in fact called Sonia Gandhi for help! The Times of India reported on 9 August 2003 in an article titled: “Congress silent on cadres linked to Gujarat riots” that the JUH secretary N A Farooqui says: “The Congress has committed sins of omission and commission during the riots. Former MP Ehsan Jaffri had called up Sonia Gandhi for help. She didn’t take a strong stand in her subsequent visit to Gujarat. The local bodies were mostly headed by the Congress which could have done a lot for relief and rehabilitation, but it was all left to the NGOs.” As late as August 2003, no claim of Jafri calling Modi is made, in fact JUH claimed that Jafri had called Sonia Gandhi!

Also Roy says-“ The mobile police vans around his house did not intervene.” This is totally incorrect. Police outside his house not only intervened, they shot dead 5 rioters outside his house and saved the lives of 180 Muslims, at a great risk to their own personal life. Police fired 124 rounds and burst 134 tear gas shells at the spot, also injured 11 Hindus and lathi-charged the crowd as well, according to the SC-appointed SIT’s report, Page 1. Jafri’s widow Zakia Jafri also said in her statement to the Police, recorded under Section 161 of CrPC on 6 March 2002 that the police saved her and many others that day in Gulberg Society by transporting them in vans, and had it not been for timely action by the Police, the mob would have lynched them all. This is also mentioned in the SIT report on page 16.

Note here that even Roy does not claim that Jafri telephoned the Chief Minister Narendra Modi as late as May 2002! Now lies are out that Jafri actually phoned Modi and was abused by Modi on phone! On page 203-204 the SIT says that though P C Pandey (Ahmedabad Police Commissioner) received/made 302 calls in 24 hours on 28 February 2002, no call was made to him by Jafri, whose landline was the only phone in operation in the entire housing complex at that time. And yet, some ‘activists’ seem to have paid bribes to a witness and survivor, Imtiaz Pathan to falsely claim that Modi had abused Jafri on phone, and Jafri told him (Pathan) this fact before he died!!!

If all the below-mentioned facts are reported by the media, then the reality will be out for everyone to see. There is a heap of evidence present to prove the opposite i.e. that Jafri did not call Modi, which is ignored largely by the mainstream media, particularly TV channels like NDTV, CNN-IBN.  One eye witness who has claimed this, Imtiaz Pathan who claimed that Jafri called Modi on phone and before dying Jafri told him (Pathan) that Modi abused him on phone. (This is of course, ridiculous. Let us say, for argument’s sake that Jafri did call Modi and Modi did not want to help him. Would Modi have abused him on phone? Modi would have said “We will send help as soon as possible” and not sent help in such a case. Is Modi a fool to abuse Jafri on phone even if he did not want Jafri to be saved when he knew that anything spoken on phone can be recorded? Such a ridiculous charge has no credibility).

In his immediate testimony to the police in 2002 soon after the riots, Pathan had not named Modi at all, nor made this allegation (Of Jafri calling him and Modi abusing Jafri) for many years after 2002! This charge was first made by Pathan in 2009, years after the incident. If this was true, he would have said so in 2002 itself, and not in 2009 as an ‘after-thought’.

Imtiaz Pathan has claimed the following things wrongly:

1- Police did not come to the complex till 4:30- 5:00 pm
2- Ehsan Jafri gave himself to the crowd, told the crowd “Take me, but spare the women and children”
3- Police Commissioner P C Pandey visited Jafri at 10 am on 28 February (All the above things are wrong on facts, i.e. blatant lies)

Hence it is clear that Imtiaz Pathan has been tutored by someone to claim this. Let us first list some points:

1- The Times of India in its online edition on 28 February 2002 reported at 2:34 PM :

“Ahmedabad: At least six persons were injured when police opened fire to disperse a rampaging mob in Meghaninagar area of the city on Thursday afternoon. The injured were brought to civil hospital where the condition of at least three is stated to be serious…the incident took place at Chamanpura area under Meghaninagar police station…(Ehsan Jafri case)”

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com//india/Police-open-fire-in-Ahmedabad-6-hurt/articleshow/2360713.cms

This is the Ehsan Jafri case- Chamanpura. NOTE THAT THIS REPORT PUBLISHED AT 2:34 PM says that police came and opened fire injuring so many people. India Today weekly dated 18 March 2002 also reports : “Reinforcements did arrive but by that time the mob had swelled to 10,000”. Since this report was posted at 2:34 PM it is clear that this event of police coming and firing must have happened much earlier, say at 1:30 pm at least considering the time it takes to get information, prepare report, proof read it, edit it and post it online. This completely dismantles Imtiaz Pathan’s lies that the police did not come till 4:30-5 pm when The Times’ report POSTED ONLINE at 2:34 PM says that police came and fired.

We also have the statement on Zakia Jafri recorded under Section 161 Cr.PC on 6 March 2002 that the police saved her and dozens of residents that day. The Times of India also reported in its online edition on 28 Feb in a report posted at 9:41 PM. We quote from Times of India online edition posted on 28 Feb night at 9:41 PM “Meanwhile fire tenders which rushed to the spot (Chamanpura- Ehsan Jafri case) were turned back by the irate mob which disallowed the Ahmedabad Fire Brigade (AFB) personnel and the district police from rushing to rescue…Sources in Congress Party said that the former MP after waiting in vain till 12.30 pm for official help to arrive had opened fire on the mob in self-defense, injuring four…”.

Despite being overwhelmingly outnumbered by the mob which had swelled to more than 10,000 (Zakia Jafri herself told India Today weekly in its issue of 18 March 2002-“I have never seen such a huge mob, they burnt alive my husband”), and the mob going crazy by Jafri firing on them with his revolver, the police did a brave job and at a great personal risk they fired on the Hindus and shot dead 5 Hindus outside his house as reported by weekly India Today dated 18 March 2002 and Times of India 28 Feb online. This also did not stop the violence because the crowd was willing to lose a few lives to, as S K Modi puts in his book “Godhra- The Missing rage”, ‘teach Jafri a lesson’. Thus Imtiaz Pathan’s claims have no credibility since police arrived much before 4:30-5 pm and shot dead 5 rioters outside his house. Police saved more than 180 Muslims in this episode since there were 250 people inside Jafri’s house and the mob killed 68- after all missing were declared dead, despite being overwhelmingly outnumbered.

2- Ehsan Jafri fired on the crowd in self-defense. Whether he should have done so or not is a matter of debate, but this act drove the crowd mad and it resolved to kill him, and was willing to lose a few lives. We have seen reports of Times of India and India Today to know that he did fire on the mob which drove it mad. Imtiaz Pathan does not say this. Pathan lies and says: “Jafri appealed to the crowd to spare women and children. He said, ‘Take me, kill me but leave these innocent people’ and gave himself to the crowd.” This claim is absolute trash since it is an established fact that Jafri did not do anything like this and fired on the crowd in self-defense with his revolver, as reported by weekly India Today, Times of India, and also Outlook. SIT has also said that Jafri did indeed fire on the mob, killing 1 and injuring 15, in its report on page 1. This nails Imtiaz Pathan’s another lie.

3- Narendra Modi was very busy that day and there is no way he could have talked to Ehsan Jafri on phone. Though Modi had a mobile phone at that time, he didn’t use it much. That day, all his official lines were busy and he was very busy handling the riots.  The SIT has said in its report on page 204 that the landline at Jafri’s house was the ONLY phone in operation in the entire complex, and that Jafri did not have a mobile. If Jafri did call Modi and was abused by him, Jafri would have told this to his widow Zakia or some other people instead of Imtiaz Pathan, who did not make this allegation for a good 7-8 years after 2002.

4- Pathan also claimed that the then Ahmedabad Police Commissioner P C Pandey had visited Jafri’s place in the morning. But the SC-appointed SIT has dismissed this claim after talking to P C Pandey and examining all evidence (and call records of P C Pandey, who made/received as many as 302 calls between 00:35 and 24:00 on 28 February 2002) and said that instead it was Congress Mahamantri Ambalal Nadia who came to meet Jafri at Gulbarg Society at 10 AM and left 10:30 AM. The SIT has said in its final report on page 201 that: “It is conclusively established that Shri P C Pandey did not visit Gulbarg  Society in the forenoon of 28 February”.

This exposes Pathan’s lies. Note that for around 10 years, from 2002 to 2012, a myth was out in the media that the then Ahmedabad Police Commissioner P C Pandey had visited Jafri’s house in the forenoon of 28 February 2002, before it was attacked. [At one time, in 2010, even this writer believed that myth, that P C Pandey had visited his house.] The truth came out in 2012 with the SIT report, which revealed that call records conclusively prove that P C Pandey did not visit Jafri’s house. But neither Imtiaz Pathan nor his obvious tutors knew this in 2009, and thought that it was Pandey himself who visited the place. So they tutored Pathan to claim that Pandey had visited the place. This clearly shows that Imtiaz Pathan was tutored to make such a claim of Jafri calling Modi. Had he been a genuine witness, he would have honestly stated that he did not see P C Pandey at Jafri’s place in the forenoon of 28 February 2002.

The SIT said that it found no record of any call to Modi by Jafri on pages 261-262. The man with the task of doing this, i.e. requisitioning  the call records was a very anti-Narendra Modi official and a favorite of Teesta-NGOs-Media brigade, Rahul Sharma. There is no way he would have missed such a record, had it been true.

Some other questions which can be raised here are: Why didn’t Jafri call any CONGRESS LEADER and ask the Congress Party to assemble 500 workers outside his house to save his life? Why couldn’t the Congress Party have do anything to save its former MP? Jafri was reported to have called Amarsinh Chaudhary, the then PCC chief many times, and indeed made several calls to CONGRESS LEADERS also. The media hid from the public for many years that a top accused in this case was none other than Congress leader Meghsingh Chaudhary himself. He was arrested not by Gujarat police, but by the SC-appointed SIT itself in 2009. One link:

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2009-03-26/subverse/28032145_1_religious-symbols-religion-and-politics-gulbarga-society

Even if there was a record of any such call, how can the statement of a THIRD PERSON (Pathan, who has given so many wrong claims, like police not coming till 4:30- 5 pm when it came much earlier, and the lie claiming that Jafri surrendered himself to the crowd when he in fact fired on it, and P C Pandey visiting the house when he did not) who was at neither end of the alleged telephone call be relied?

In June 2016, after the trial court judgment on this case, Imtiaz Pathan’s brother  Firoz Khan Pathan expressed anger against Teesta Setalvad and other NGOs who ‘used them for personal gains’, reported by Ahmedabad Mirror on 3 June 2016.

https://ahmedabadmirror.indiatimes.com/ahmedabad/others/helpless-then-helpless-now/articleshow/52561384.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst

This clearly indicates who may have tutored him. Those who tutored him to make this ridiculous charge years after 2002 also should be prosecuted. And those who give credibility to such ridiculous and laughable charges like Outlook, NDTV and Rana Ayub should also be prosecuted.

The special SIT court gave its verdict in June 2016 and convicted 24 people and says in its judgment on page 547:

“Shri J.M.Suthar, IO-SIT, having investigated into and obtained call details of Shri Ehsan Jafri’s landline and it is pointed out by Shri Bhardwaj that Shri J.M.Suthar in the course of his testimony on page No.16 in paragraph No.13, has clearly testified that the call details gathered in the course of the investigation clearly established that only two calls were made from the landline of Shri Ehsan Jafri on the fateful day and these calls were made to one Shri Badruddin Shaikh who was a Congress Corporator and one Noormohammad, both of whose statements were recorded by Shri J.M.Suthar. It is pointed out that in the circumstances, the entire version supplied by these so-called eye-witnesses is not correct and this further raises doubts with regard to the presence of such witnesses within the residence of Shri Ehsan Jafri at the time of the gruesome incident.”

It also says on pp 545-46: “It is further submitted by Shri Bhardwaj that the fact of PW-314 being present in the house of Shri Ehsan Jafri is also a matter of grave doubts inasmuch as, the witness claims that Shri Ehsan Jafri attempted to call up political leaders and other persons in an effort to seek assistance and such calls were made from his residence after 1:30 p.m. It is pointed out that number of witnesses including PWs 106, 107 and 116respectively being Imtiyazkhan, Mrs.Rupaben Modi and Sayeedkhan, have also attempted to corroborate such version by stating that Shri Ehsan Jafri attempted to call a number of political leaders including the then sitting Chief Minister and other important political leaders of the B.J.P., but however, it is pointed out that from the cross examination of this witness, it clearly emerges that no such incident of Shri Ehsan Jafri attempting to call up such persons was disclosed by the witness in his statements recorded before the IOs on 06/03/2002 and 11/03/2002. It is pointed out that even if it is assumed that the IOs were biased and did not faithfully record what was stated, then it is clearly emerging from the cross examination of the PW-314 that even in his own voluntary application accompanied by supporting affidavit made to the Commissioner of Police, no such fact was narrated. It is pointed out that the witness has further conceded in his cross examination on page No.76 in paragraph No.56 the fact of his having stated before the Nanavati-Shah Commission that the phone lines of Gulbarg Society, more particularly the landline of Shri Ehsan Jafri was not functional after 1:30 p.m. It is submitted that if that was really so, then the question of Shri Ehsan Jafri calling up persons including the then Chief Minister of Gujarat State an(d) getting negative responses from all such persons is a blatant untruth.“

More details of this issue are given comprehensively in the book, but not in this website. A special chapter on the SIT report is also in the book, which reveals the whole truth and the SIT’s observations.

Copyright © Gujaratriots.com

Myth

A B Vajpayee said Modi is not following Rajdharma

FACT: This incident happened on 4th April 2002, when the then Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee visited Gujarat. When a reporter asked the Prime Minister in his joint press conference with Narendra Modi what message he will like to give the Gujarat Chief Minister, he said: “A ruler should follow Rajdharma. Not differentiate between the subjects on the basis of birth, caste or religion. I always try to do so. I am sure Narendra bhai is also doing so.”

The latter part of the sentence: “I am sure that Narendra Modi is also following Rajdharma” was completely ignored, not reported and it was made to sound as if Vajpayee had said: “Narendra Modi should follow Rajdharma (Implied that he is not doing so now)”.

Luckily, the entire video is today on YouTube and can be viewed by anyone.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5W3RCpOGbQ

The Hindu reported on 5 April 2002, i.e. the next day, in a report titled: “Vajpayee’s advice to Modi” that: “The Prime Minister added, “I believe he is performing his Raj dharma properly.”

https://web.archive.org/web/20050519055208/http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/2002/04/05/stories/2002040509161100.htm

In the days of the domination of the biased media, and terrible PR work from the Gujarat Government, this lie continued unchallenged for almost 10 years. But now with the social media and YouTube taking away the monopoly of TV channels, the reality came out.

Some more details of this issue are given in the book but not in this website.

Copyright © Gujaratriots.com 

You can follow us on twitter at https://twitter.com/Gujaratriotscom

After numerous requests from readers, we have opened a Facebook page as well, on 17 Feb 2014. You can ‘like’ our Facebook page here:

https://www.facebook.com/gujaratriots2002?hc_location=timeline

Myth

No one was brought to justice for the riots

Myth

Zakia Jafri’s complaint against Narendra Modi is a genuine one

Myth

Narendra Modi told police officers to go slow on Hindus in the 27 Feb night meeting

Myth

Narendra Modi never expressed sadness for the post-Godhra riots

Myth

Gujarat Government did nothing to help the victims

Fact: We have already seen the steps taken by the Government to quell the violence, and in saving the lives of the victims- for example in Sanjeli, Bodeli and Viramgam areas of Gujarat. Hindus were also saved by violent Muslims in many places in Gujarat, like in Jamalpur on 1 March 2002, and in Modasa on 19 March 2002 when Muslims attacked. But there has also been a claim by many that the Gujarat Government was like Hitler and have called these plain riots as ‘holocaust’ and equated them with the killing of Jews in Germany. What a ridiculous comparison!

The Gujarat Government spent a lot of money for providing relief to the riot victims. None other than the UPA Government’s MoS for Home Sriprakash Jaiswal said in the Rajya Sabha that too in a written reply on 11 May 2005. He said an amount of Rs 1.5 lakh was paid by the government to the next of kin of each person killed and Rs 5,000, Rs 15,000, Rs 25,000 and Rs 50,000 to those injured up to 10, 30, 40 and 50 per cent respectively.

In addition, Jaiswal said relief was also extended by the state government to the victims of the riots under the heads of cash doles and assistance for household kits, foodgrains to Below Poverty Line (BPL) families in affected areas, housing assistance, rebuilding earning assets, rehabilitation of small business, assistance to industries/shop and hotel and so on.

The state government, Jaiswal said has informed that a total of Rs 204.62 crore has been incurred by it towards relief and rehabilitation measures. The Gujarat government has also informed that they had published the data as recommended by the NHRC, he added.

See link: http://www.expressindia.com/news/fullstory.php?newsid=46538

And the Gujarat Government in an advertisement given in weekly India Today dated 6 May 2002 said-

“ At the rate of Rs 30 per person, the Government is spending Rs 35 lakh a day on providing foodgrains to the 1.1 lakh inmates of the 99-odd relief camps in the state, 47 of them in Ahmedabad.

The relief operations at the camps are being directly looked after by IAS officers of the rank of secretary to the state Government.

The camps in Ahmedabad have been divided into six groups. Each group is being monitored by a bureaucrat of the rank of secretary. The secretaries have been looking after the minutest problems of the inmates. Teachers were deputed in each camp to help the children prepare for the exams and the state Health Department has been taking special steps to look after the well being of the inmates. In order to rehabilitate the rural inmates, the Government has floated the Sant Kabir Awas Yojana as per the directions of Prime Minister A. B. Vajpayee. The scheme will enable the inmates to build houses.”(And in these camps were 1 lakh Muslims and 40,000 Hindus as well)

How ridiculous to equate this with Hitler! Did Hitler ever spent crores on helping Jews  or other Christian Germans affected by violence? He ordered killing of Jews- not spending of money to help them. Has any government in the world ever cared about minority Hindus who suffered like this? In the 1971 East Pakistan genocide, West Pakistani soldiers killed around 2 million Hindus  (and also other Bangladeshi Muslims when their leader declared that Bangladeshis are un-Islamic). and also raped at least 2,50,000 Bengali women. From 1947, Pakistan has constantly massacred the Hindus, reducing their population from 20 % in West Pakistan to 1 % now. In Bangladesh also the Hindu population has declined from 34 % in 1901 to 29 % in 1947 to just 7 % now. Hindus are regularly killed, women raped, abducted and forcibly converted to Islam, temples attacked, Hindus thrown out of their homes in Bangladesh and Pakistan. In Kashmir in January 1990, Hindus were given 3 choices by local Islamic leaders- convert to Islam, die or leave Kashmir. Nobody ever reconstructed houses for these Hindus. Nobody gave them financial compensation of crores of rupees. And nobody spent 35 lakhs per day on them. Nobody arrested the culprits and punished them. Those who order killing of others- or want others to suffer horribly, do not take the pains to do all that the Gujarat Government did. Not only did the Gujarat Government do all this- the police also arrested 35,552 people as of 28 April 2002, out of which 27,901 were Hindus. Around 20,000 people were arrested as a preventive measure. No Islamic country (or our own country in Kashmir in 1990) or other mass murderers like Saddam Hussain, Hitler ever carried out preventive arrests to save the victims. And already 195 people have been convicted for rioting- the highest ever in Gujarat and indeed, in the country. No Islamic country has ever punished anyone for killings of Hindus, not even of the tallest Hindu leader of Pakistan- Sudamchand Chawla, who was killed by Islamic radicals on 28 January 2002. And the so-called human rights activists have concocted many tales of rapes and killings,like the false claim that Ehsan Jafri’s daughters were raped, or Medina was raped, or the outrageous lie that a pregnant woman’s womb was ripped open and foetus taken out, when nothing like this happened. Nobody has ever lied and falsely exaggerated the killing of Hindus in Pakistan and Bangladesh at the hands of Muslims, or made fake stories of Hindu women’s wombs  being ripped open and foetuses taken out. Actually they have all done exactly the opposite. Killings of lakhs of Hindus in Pakistan and Bangladesh have been ignored, rapes and abductions of Hindu girls have been suppressed ever after 1947. Hindu survivors of the Partition killings of 1947 have given graphic details of how Hindu and Sikh girls were raped, and their breasts cut off in  1947 in West Pakistan. Just like some people deny the holocaust of Jews (Like the Iranian President), these people have whitewashed Islam’s guilt even of medieval India, when crores of Hindus were killed. Such people, who deny the holocausts of Hindus and falsely allege rapes of Muslims, are hailed as ‘liberals’ and ‘rationalists’ in the media.


Pakistan’s TALLEST Hindu leader, Sudham Chand Chawla was killed in broad daylight in Jacobabad on 29 Jan 2002 while returning from his rice meal. The culprits were not nabbed, nor was any compensation given to his family. He had in fact been complaining to the so-called civil society of Pakistan for years about the threat to his life, to the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan and yet nobody did anything. If this was the case with the BIGGEST Hindu leader, then what must be the story of ordinary Hindus, who have already been reduced from 20 % in 1947 to just 1 % now?

http://www.sudhamchandchawla.com/

The PR work of the Gujarat Government indeed does not seem to be up to the mark. The media is of course guilty of ignoring all these facts, and needlessly infuriating Muslims by lying that Narendra Modi is responsible for harm caused to the community. Far from it, his government actually helped the victims- both Hindu and Muslim- by spending lakhs per day on them. 40,000 Hindus were thrown out of their homes by Muslims in the Gujarat riots and the Gujarat Government gave them relief camps and rehabilitation help too. Perhaps this was the only case in the world where oppressed Hindus were given state help! Needless infuriation of Muslims has caused tremendous damage to the country. Indeed as Belgium-based world-famous scholar Dr Koenraad Elst has written: “You wouldn’t guess it from their polished convent-school English, their trendy terminology, or their sanctimoniousness, but the likes of Romila Thapar, Irfan Habib or Gyanendra Pandey have blood on their hands.  The wave of Muslim violence after the Ayodhya demolition (and the boomerang of police repression and Shiv Sena retaliation) was at least partly due to the disinformation by supposed experts who denied that the disputed building had a violent iconoclastic prehistory, and implied that Hindus can get away with concocted history in their attacks on innocent mosques.  This disinformation gave Muslim militants the sense of justification needed to mount a “revenge” operation and to mobilize decent Muslims for acts of violence which they never would have committed if they had known the truth about Islam’s guilt in Ayodhya.”

Myth

A pregnant woman’s womb was ripped open and foetus taken out

Fact: Dr J S Kanoria who carried out the post mortem of the woman, Kausarbanu on 2 March 2002 found that her womb was intact, and that she had died of burns suffered in the riots.

The Times of India reported on 18 March 2010:

“Doc’s testimony nails lie in Naroda Patia fetus story

AHMEDABAD: One of the most gory stories of the Naroda Patia massacre, of how a pregnant woman’s womb was ripped open and the fetus dangled on the tip of a sword by the mob, before she was killed, has been busted by a testimony given by a government doctor.

 After 95 persons were killed on February 28, 2002 at Naroda Patia, stories were doing rounds that the killers had cut open eight-month pregnant Kausar Bano Shaikh’s womb, pulled out the fetus and killed her.

 Dr J S Kanoria, who conducted post-mortem on the woman’s body on March 2 (2002), told the special court on Wednesday (17 March 2010), supported by documents, that he found the fetus intact. He said he was posted at Nadiad but called to the Civil Hospital following the emergency when he conducted the autopsy on an unidentified body, which was later identified as Kausar Bano.

 Kanoria showed his post-mortem report to the court saying he found the fetus intact in the woman’s womb itself. The fetus weighed 2,500 g and was 45 cm long. He mentioned about burn injuries in his post-mortem note, but was quiet on whether there was any other injury on the body.

 In April last year (2009), the Gujarat government argued before the SC on this case after SIT submitted a report in a sealed cover. The government’s claim was that SIT had refuted charges that Kausar Bano’s fetus was pulled out of her womb and killed by sword before her eyes by violent mob. Senior counsel Mukul Rohatgi contended that such allegations levelled by an NGO were proved false by SIT report. (The Supreme Court-appointed SIT had already said in its report in April 2009 that there is no truth in the allegation that Kausar Bano’s womb was ripped open and foetus taken out. Note that this SIT was appointed by highly anti-Modi judges like Aftab Alam, Arijit Pasayat etc). Nearly a year later, the doctor, considered a neutral government witness, has deposed the same before the trial court.”

The link for the above report is:

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Docs-testimony-nails-lie-in-Naroda-Patia-fetus-story/articleshow/5696161.cms

Weekly India Today dated 5 April 2010 reported:

“Significantly, in March 2003, the SC had stalled the trial of nine Gujarat riot cases, thanks to the relentless campaign by the human rights activists seeking justice for the Muslim victims. The riot victims said they won’t get justice as long as the Gujarat Government had a role in the police probe and the subsequent trial. The SIT is reinvestigating the cases under the virtual supervision of the apex court, with even the judges and public prosecutors being selected under the SC’s monitoring.

As the SIT goes about its task, more and more evidence is surfacing that the human rights lobby had, in many cases, spun macabre stories of rape and brutal killings by tutoring witnesses before the SC. In the process, it might have played a significant role in misleading the SC to suit its political objectives against Modi and his government.

Last week (in March 2010), one of the most horrible examples of cruelty resurfaced once again as the trial of the Naroda Patiya case, where 94 persons were killed, began in the SC-monitored special court in Ahmedabad. Soon after the riots, the human rights activists and the Muslim witnesses had alleged that a pregnant woman Kausarbanu’s womb was ripped open by rioters and the foetus was flung out at the point of a sword. The gruesome incident was seen as the worst-possible example of medieval vandalism in the modern age.

Last week, eight years after the alleged incident, Dr J.S. Kanoria, who conducted the post-mortem on Kausarbanu’s body on March 2, 2002, denied that any such incident had ever happened. Instead, he told the court: “After the post-mortem, I found that her foetus was intact and that she had died of burns suffered during the riot.” Later Kanoria, 40, told INDIA TODAY, “I have told the court what I had already written in my post-mortem report eight years ago. The press should have checked the report before believing that her womb was ripped open. As far as I remember, I did her post-mortem at noon on March 2, 2002.”

A careful study of the three police complaints, claiming that Kausarbanu’s womb was ripped open by the rioters, shows several loopholes. While one complaint accuses Guddu Chara, one of the main accused in the Naroda Patiya case, of ripping open Kausarbanu’s womb, extracting her foetus and flinging it with a sword; another complaint accuses Babu Bajrangi, yet another accused in the case, of doing the act. A third complaint, on the other hand, does not name the accused but describes the alleged act.

Modi will also have reasons to smile at the affidavits filed by the Muslim witnesses in the SC in 2003 at the behest of Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) and Teesta Setalvad on the basis of which the trial in nine cases were stalled for six long years. The most glaring hole is in the affidavit of Nanumiya Malek, a key witness in the Naroda Gam case. In his affidavit before the SC filed on November 15, 2003, Malek stated that a newly married woman called Madina, who lost four of her relatives, including her husband in the riots, had been raped by the rioters.

Malek’s affidavit states: “I was witness to the crimes of murder and rape that took place on Madina and her family. I also saw seven people being burnt alive, including four orphans. I request the SC to keep the details of this rape victim confidential since she is alive and use it only for the purpose of trial and conviction of the rapists.” But on May 5, 2009, in his statement before the SIT, Malek said: “I had wrongly claimed that Madina had been raped. I made the charge because of Teesta Setalvad’s pressure. I kept on telling her not to include that charge in my affidavit, yet it was included.”

In her statement before the SIT on May 20, 2008, Madina, who has remarried now, said: “The charge made by Malek claiming that I was raped by a riotous mob is false. I wasn’t raped. When the riotous mob put my house on fire, I tried to run but was attacked by a rioter who injured me with a knife. Later I managed to merge in a Muslim crowd.”

There are six other affidavits filed by different Muslim witnesses on November 15, 2003, that wantonly allege rape in the Naroda Gam and Naroda Patiya riot cases without giving any details. Interestingly, all the affidavits have a uniform language: “Over 110 persons were not simply killed, but raped and mutilated as well, including young children. We urge the SC to stay the trials and transfer them to a neighbouring state and also order fresh investigation.” The affidavits state that they had been filed at the behest of Setalvad and in the presence of her co-activist Rais Khan.

If this wasn’t enough, other glaring attempts by human rights activists to tutor witnesses have come to the fore. For example, soon after the Gulberg massacre in which Ehsan Jafri was killed, nearly a dozen Muslim witnesses told the police that Jafri had fired in self-defence, killed a rioter and injured 14 others. They also said that this led the mob to resort to violence and attack Muslims in Gulberg with vengeance. But almost half of them who deposed before the special court have retracted from this statement. …

When the SIT started taking statements of witnesses in the Gulberg Society case, around 20 witnesses came with typed statements. But the SIT objected to it, citing Section 161 of the CRPC, saying that the police must record the statement of a witness. So when the SIT forced the witnesses to give their statement during the interrogation, there was a vast difference between the ‘readymade typed’ statements and the oral evidence that the police had received earlier.

As a senior lawyer defending the accused puts it: “The witnesses under the influence of the human rights activists didn’t allow videotaping of their statements while they were being recorded. There is an obvious attempt on the part of activists to dictate not just the SIT, but also the courts.”…

Credibility Gap

Then
In his petition before the SC, Nanumiya Malek, a key witness in the Naroda Gam case, says that a married woman called Madina had been raped by rioters.		Now
Malek later told the SIT that Madina’s rape was an accusation put forth at the behest of Teesta Setalvad. Madina also denied the charge.
Then
For the past eight years, human rights activists and Naroda Patiya victims have alleged that the rioters ripped open the womb of the pregnant Kausarbanu.		Now
Dr J.S. Kanoria, who conducted a post-mortem on Kausarbanu’s body, says she died of burns during the riot and that her womb was intact.
Then
While reinvestigating the Gulberg case, the SIT comes across nearly 20 witnesses who came with their readymade, typed statements to which the SIT objects.		Now
The Muslim witnesses refuse to videotape their statements. The statements that are recorded by the SIT do not match the readymade statements.
Then
Imtiaz Pathan, a key witness in the Gulberg case, tells the special court that Ehsan Jafri was abused by Modi when Jafri called the latter seeking his help during the riots.		Now
The SIT has not been able to find any evidence or a record of Ehsan Jafri making a phone call to Narendra Modi.
Then
In their 2003 SC petition, Muslim witnesses accused the rioters of raping women. As a result, the trials of nine major cases were stalled for over six years.		Now
In their statements made before the SC-appointed SIT, the witnesses haven’t accused the rioters of raping women.

“

This full report can be read by clicking here.

Just that this weekly India Today does not seem to remember that it itself also reported this lie on a ‘pregnant woman’s womb being ripped open’ in its issue dated 18 March 2002. 

The Hindu also reported on 18 March 2010:

“Foetus was intact in Naroda-Patiya victim: doctor

Manas Dasgupta

 AHMEDABAD: The doctor who performed autopsy on the bodies of three victims of the Naroda-Patiya massacre during the 2002 communal riots in Gujarat has denied that the womb of a pregnant woman was slit open by the attackers.

 During cross-examination before special court judge Jyotsnaben Yagnik on Wednesday, Dr. J.S. Kanoria said he found the foetus in place in the womb of Kausarbanu Sheikh. As part of the post-mortem procedure, it was he who took the foetus out of the womb, the doctor said.

 It was widely alleged during the riots that the then State Bajrang Dal convener, Babu Bajrangi, had led a violent mob of activists, some of whom not only burnt alive local Muslims but also raped the pregnant woman, slit open her womb with a sharp-edged weapon and threw both the mother and the foetus into a fire.

 Dr. Kanoria admitted that he had found Kausarbanu’s body 100 per cent burnt. To a question by the public prosecutor, he did not rule out the possibility of her having been thrown alive into a fire by the attackers, resulting in her death, but disagreed with the claim that her womb was slit open.

 As a large number of bodies were arriving at the Ahmedabad civil hospital, Dr. Kanoria was specially summoned there from the Nadiad hospital and he conducted post-mortem on three bodies including that of a pregnant woman, who was later identified as Kausarbanu…”

The link for this report is:

https://web.archive.org/web/20100427044946/http://www.hindu.com/2010/03/18/stories/2010031863801300.htm

   In the 2007 Tehelka sting operation also, Babu Bajrangi did not claim to slit open any womb. He was simply saying that “The FIR on me says that I cut open the womb, but I did not do so”. Tehelka wrongly claimed that “Bajrangi ‘boasted’ slitting open the womb”.

Even if he had said so in the sting operation, Tehelka should have checked if they were boastful lies or the truth. Since he was told that this is a private conversation between a man writing a book from the VHP point of view, he may have indulged in blatant empty lies. Actually he did not even indulge in boastful lies here- he totally denied the crime.

Even in the judgment of Jyotsna Yagnik convicting Kodnani and Bajrangi on 29 August 2012 (which was overturned by the Gujarat HC later, which acquitted Mayaben Kodnani and upheld Bajrangi’s conviction), Jyotsna Yagnik’s judgment denied such an act. The Times of India reported:

 ”A decade later (i.e. in 2012), the special court accepted that Kausarbanu was killed in the most ghastly manner by Bajrangi and his associates, but the story of bringing her fetus out and swirling it on tip of the sword is improbable and an exaggerated narration.

Designated judge Jyotsana Yagnik discussed in detail the possibility of such incident after evaluating testimonies of eyewitnesses, extra-judicial confession by Bajrangi and medical evidence. The judge concluded that both a 14-year-old witness Javed Shaikh and accused Bajrangi were not gynaecologists and they did not know anything about the possible situation when a nine-month pregnant woman’s belly was slit with a sword or a knife.

The court accepted evidence, though considered medical evidence quite diluted, and held that Kausarbanu was killed at the khancho near water tank,as described by witnesses and accused himself. However, the fetus could not be brought out, Kausarbanu died there along with fetus in her body, Kausharbanu and unborn child were burnt there, the order reads.

The court came to a conclusion that Bajrangi killed the woman, but the description was exaggerated. It must be understood that this is an observation of child of about 14-year-old then and that his perception to such ghastly occurrence would be little different then the adult man with all understanding, the court opined.“

http://mobiletoi.timesofindia.com/mobile.aspx?article=yes&pageid=5&sectid=edid=&edlabel=TOIA&mydateHid=04-09-2012&pubname=Times+of+India+-+Ahmedabad&edname=&articleid=Ar00505&publabel=TOI

Copyright © Gujaratriots.com

_____________________________________________________________________________________

You can follow us on twitter at https://twitter.com/Gujaratriotscom

After numerous requests from readers, we have opened a Facebook page as well, on 17 Feb 2014. You can ‘like’ our Facebook page here:

https://www.facebook.com/gujaratriots2002?hc_location=timeline

Narendra Modi gave free hand to rioters for 3 days

Fact: In reality, Narendra Modi ‘frantically’ called the Army units to Ahmedabad on February 28- as per the report of The Hindu the next day. India Today weekly’s report ‘Chronology of a Crisis’ on this topic in its issue dated 18 March 2002 also proves this beyond doubt.

The full details of the steps taken by the Gujarat Government to control violence can be read in this article:

https://gujaratriots.com/gujaratriots/news/chapter-02-role-of-the-government-in-controlling-violence

Before seeing this issue, let us remember the following facts. In an interview given by Narendra Modi to Outlook magazine in its issue dated 18 March 2002–

“Were you playing the fiddle while Gujarat burned?

No. Contrary to what is now being projected, I brought sanity within 72 hours of the violent outbreak…”

Note Narendra Modi’s sentence “No. Contrary to what is now being projected, I brought sanity within 72 hours of the violent outbreak.” In other words, the projection against Modi started AFTER the riots. We have already seen the reports of the newspapers like The Hindu, The Telegraph to note that there were no allegations against Narendra Modi or the Gujarat Government at the time of the actual riots. They started much later.  Doordarshan news said on 3rd March 2002 (Sunday) at night in the English bulletin: “Violence has ended in a record time in Ahmedabad…Only 3 days…In the past it would take many weeks… Today (Sunday) curfew was relaxed, people bought items from bazaar…”. No allegation against the state government but praise of controlling violence in just 3 days! 

   All accusations on Narendra Modi and demands for his resignation, dismissal started AFTER the riots. This was because, the media wanted some scapegoat to be made for the riots. It wanted Modi to sack a few police officers, drop a minister or two. But Modi did nothing of the sort. He did not blame anyone, did not make anyone a scapegoat. In an interview to NDTV broadcast in March/April 2004, Narendra Modi said to Shekhar Gupta (Editor of The Indian Express): “You all wanted that someone be made scapegoat. I did not do that. I allowed you to break all pots on my head alone. You have all decided, all these riots happened under this man (Narendra Modi). Until this man is removed from the Chief Minister’s post, we will not rest in peace. My best wishes to you in your mission.” Narendra Modi did not resign, and the BJP did not dismiss him, so the media was livid.

The fact is that the Army staged a flag march in Ahmedabad, Vadodara, Surat and Godhra on 1st March- i.e. the 2nd day. Yet, the TV channel CNN-IBN on its Hindi channel, reported on 26 October 2007 (at the time of Tehelka’s sting operation being broadcast, around 1 and half months before the Gujarat Assembly elections) by writing on TV screens: “There was given three days freedom to kill in Gujarat”.

   There was already a minority backlash on the second day of the riots-i.e. on 1st March the Muslims started a backlash in Ahmedabad, as reported by The Hindu the next day. The question of the next two days does not arise (as the Army was present) and even on 28 February when the Army was not present, the police fired around 1496 rounds, out of which at least 600 were fired in Ahmedabad alone, shot dead 11 Hindus and injured 16. Total 4297 tear gas shells were burst in the state on that day and 700 arrests were also made.

   Out of the 3 days the Army was present on 2 days and the extent of violence was far less as compared to the first day. The Hindu itself reported on 3rd March 2002  that the situation improved in Ahmedabad on 2nd March  i.e. the 3rd day of the riots. The Tribune reported on 3rd March 2002 that:

“(On 2nd March) Ahmedabad, the worst hit by the communal flare-up in the wake of Godhra train killings, was virtually back to normal…”  

That is, the Government managed to control riots in the communally sensitive state in 3 days after Godhra, and in only 2 days in a communally ultra-sensitive place like Ahmedabad.

 Police saved 2500 Muslims from certain death in Sanjeli- a town in North Gujarat on 1st March 2002- i.e. the 2nd day of the riots.

Narendra Modi did not even give 3 minutes- not to talk of 3 days to the rioters. He had ordered 827 preventive arrests on February 27 itself- and given shoot-at-sight at Godhra on February 27 itself at 9:45 AM- less than 2 hours after the Godhra carnage. The entire police force was deployed in Gujarat in view of apprehension that riots might break out on February 27 itself. The Rapid Action Force was deployed in Ahmedabad and other sensitive areas and the Centre sent in CRPF personnel-on February 27 itself.

All this was reported by various English newspapers-like The Indian Express, The Times of India, The Tribune,The Hindustan Times etc the next day- i.e. 28 February.

To see the report- click on the link- http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/2256789.cms

The Tribune’s report can be read on- http://www.tribuneindia.com/2002/20020228/main1.htm

Also- Defence Minister George Fernandes was in Ahmedabad on 1st March at 1:00 AM on Narendra Modi’s request. And the next day- he was bravely on Ahmedabad’s streets at a great risk to personal life.

On Feb 27 itself- www.rediff.com reported- “The situation became tense as news of the incident spread to other parts of the state prompting the state government to initiate precautionary security measures. Security has been tightened in Godhra and other parts of Gujarat.”
The Link for this report is:
http://www.rediff.com/news/2002/feb/27train.htm

Rediff.com also reported quoting PTI on Feb 28 evening that-“The army has been asked to stand by and the Rapid Action Force and the Central Industrial Security Force have been deployed in Ahmedabad and other places.”
The link for this report is-
http://www.rediff.com/news/2002/feb/28train15.htm

Rediff.com reported on Feb 27 itself- after Godhra that- “Two companies of the Rapid Action Force and one company of the State Reserve Police were deployed at Godhra to guard against further outbreak of violence.”
The link for the report: http://www.rediff.com/news/2002/feb/27train4.htm

   On Feb 28- curfew was imposed in Baroda at 8 Am in the morning itself- as reported by rediff.com the same day. The report says-

“Indefinite curfew was imposed in the city from 0800 hours following the stabbing incidents, a senior police official said.

Curfew had been imposed in the six police station areas of the walled city (i.e. Ahmedabad) and RAF and CISF companies have been deployed in sensitive areas, Police Commissioner Deen Dayal Tuteja said.

Indefinite curfew has also been imposed in Lunawada town of Panchmahal district after 0200 hours on Wednesday night following incidents of arson and looting, he said.

Meanwhile, indefinite curfew, imposed in Godhra town after the attack on the train on Wednesday, continued on Thursday without any relaxation.

No untoward incident was reported during the curfew so far, police said.

The situation had remained peaceful and under control in other parts of the state during the night, police said.”

The link is- http://www.rediff.com/news/2002/feb/28train1.htm

On the 2nd day of the riots- Shoot-at-sight orders were extended to Ahmedabad as well. The report of rediff.com on 1st March 2002 was-

“Alarmed by the unabated incidents of violence in the city, the Gujarat government on Friday issued shoot-at-sight orders to the police against those indulging in arson and violence.
The announcement was made by Chief Minister Narendra Modi in Ahmedabad, official sources said. Modi has issued directives to the police to deal ‘strictly with arsonists and if need be shoot-at-sight any person indulging in rioting’, they added.

Meanwhile, the army staged flag marches in the violence-hit areas of Ahmedabad – Daraipur, Shahpur, Shahibaug and Naroda – to instill confidence among the people as unabated violence has claimed 111 lives in the city alone so far.

The army personnel were out in different areas like Daraipur, Shahpur, Shahibaug and Naroda, police said.”

Link: http://www.rediff.com/news/2002/mar/01train4.htm

In chapter 3 we have already seen the reports of The Hindu and The Indian Express to know the steps taken by the Gujarat government to curb the violence. The Telegraph-published from Kolkata also reported on 1st March 2002-

“ (On Feb 28) The Vajpayee government, alarmed that law and order were spiralling out of control, ordered deployment of the army in the state. The army has already begun pre-deployment drills in violence-scarred areas and will be out latest by tomorrow morning. Defence minister George Fernandes is travelling to Gujarat tomorrow…Curfew was clamped in 26 towns… “There is a fire inside us. Our blood is boiling,” Mangalben, a woman from Dariapur, said. “What is the fault of those children who died? There is a volcano of anger.”

Link:

http://www.telegraphindia.com/1020301/front_pa.htm#head2

In other words-there was a volcano of anger among the masses- whose blood was boiling after the Muslims brutally roasted 59 kar sewaks including 15 children in Godhra. On the events of 1st March 2002, The Telegraph reported in its issue dated 2nd March-

“A funeral procession cast away its veil of mourning and exploded into a mob of killers, torching houses inside which the pursued were huddled. Official sources said eight people died in the incident, but unofficial estimates put the toll at above 30.

An agency report suggested vengeance for the death of three persons earlier in the day as the motive for the attack at Pandarwada, 70 km from Godhra….

Despite the presence of the army — some 3,500 soldiers have arrived in the state — in Ahmedabad, Surat, Vadodara and Rajkot, the rioting has not stopped.”

See link:

http://www.telegraphindia.com/1020302/front_pa.htm#head1

Those making factually incorrect charges can be tried under Section 153-A (creating enmity between two groups) for one-sided reporting and infuriating Muslims and Section 500 of IPC (Defamation) for defaming BJP, Sangh Parivar and Narendra Modi.

For full details of the steps taken by the Government see link:

https://gujaratriots.com/gujaratriots/news/chapter-02-role-of-the-government-in-controlling-violence/

To read the full chapter, read the book “Gujarat Riots: The True Story”. 

https://www.amazon.in/Gujarat-Riots-True-Story-Truth/dp/1482841649/

   ________________________________________________________________

You can follow us on twitter at https://twitter.com/Gujaratriotscom

After numerous requests from readers, we have opened a Facebook page as well, on 17 Feb 2014. You can ‘like’ our Facebook page here: https://www.facebook.com/gujaratriots2002?hc_location=timeline

 

Myth