NaMo NaMo

Namo Event

Sunday, 30 June 2013

IB, home ministry sceptical as CBI prepares to jail Amit Shah

The officers are also angry that the CBI is targeting one of their own, IB’s Rajendra Kumar.
Navtan Kumar & Abhinandan Mishra  29th Jun 2013
Amit Shah
he Central Bureau of Investigation is making preparations to indict Amit Shah, a Narendra Modi confidant, who now looks after BJP affairs in UP, in the charge sheet that it will file in the Gujarat High Court on 4 July in the Ishrat Jahan case. CBI is also trying hard to corner Narendra Modi, in order to arrest the BJP momentum before the general election in a move that could be helpful to Congress. However, officers in the Intelligence Bureau (IB) and bureaucrats in the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) are being openly sceptical of this effort, pointing out that at best the "evidence" assembled by CBI is "open to interpretation". IB and MHA are also angry that CBI is targeting IB officer Rajendra Kumar, in the process. Sources say that Kumar could also face arrest.

BJP, which has been arousing public opinion against the politicisation of CBI by the government, believes that Narendra Modi will not be charge-sheeted as of now as the CBI does not have any evidence against him but does not rule out the possibility that a case could be manufactured against Modi.

According to sources, the CBI's "evidence" against Shah includes the record of phone calls that were exchanged between Shah and IPS officer D.G. Vanzara before and after Ishrat was killed in the encounter on 15 June 2004. Rajendra Kumar was the IB officer who informed the Gujarat police about an impending attack on Modi by a Lashkar-e-Taiba module of which Ishrat Jahan was allegedly a part.

Privately, IB and MHA officials accept that the whole "drama" being played out by the CBI is being managed by the UPA government to derail Narendra Modi's campaign. "Obviously political hands are driving the CBI investigation. However, in the midst of achieving their political objective, they are damaging the relationship between government agencies that handle national security. First the CBI questioned the IB and now they are questioning Home Ministry officials. What message does this give? Officials are angry and disturbed that after 8-9 years of an incident they are being called and questioned. Such a situation has never arisen before where the CBI is at loggerheads with the Intelligence Bureau and now with the Home Ministry," a senior MHA official stated.

Commenting on recent media reports which "revealed" that Vanzara had called Shah on the day Ishrat was killed, an MHA official said that this was routine. "It is the duty of an officer to keep his minister aware of developments in such cases, especially in this case when it was about a group of LeT operatives who were on a specific mission. In the past also there have been several instances in different states where police officials have called up their political bosses, many times at odd hours, to apprise them of the developing situation."
Media reports also claimed that the CBI was going to mention in its charge sheet that Shah talked to Modi on that day.

"Everybody knows that the cases against Modi and Shah are politically motivated. There is nothing unusual about a Home Minister talking to his Chief Minister. There are no details of what transpired between the two. Therefore, it is clear that our leaders are being targeted intentionally," said UP BJP spokesperson Vijay Bahadur Pathak.

“Obviously political hands are driving the CBI investigation. However, in the midst of achieving their political objective, they are damaging the relationship between government agencies that handle national security,” complained a senior Home Ministry official.
BJP spokesperson Sudhanshu Trivedi said that the CBI has become a political tool of the Congress, and is being used to target the two leaders. "Strategic leaks are taking place, which are politically motivated. The CBI has been changing its stand in both Ishrat Jahan and Sohrabuddin encounter cases," he said. The party believes that in case Shah is arrested, there will be a strong polarization of votes against the UPA government in UP.

The MHA officer told this newspaper that whatever "evidence" has come out in public or has been shared with the MHA until now "is open to interpretation".

"The MHA has strong evidence to prove that Ishrat and the three men accompanying her were Lashkar operatives. The input that Rajendra Kumar shared with the Gujarat police was strong and credible and the MHA will stand by him on this issue," an official said.
A Gujarat High Court division bench of Justices Jayant Patel and Abhilasha Kumari on 14 June told the CBI to focus on a proper investigation rather than determine whether the IB data that Ishrat was an LeT operative was genuine or false.

However, the MHA is unlikely to give sanction to the CBI to prosecute Rajendra Kumar, who is now Special Director with the IB. The MHA is also reluctant to share the files of the encounter with the CBI. But if push comes to shove, the MHA will present the documents/file noting to court to counter the CBI's claim that the intelligence provided to the state police was not genuine.

According to officials, if Rajendra Kumar is "victimised", then it will prove to be detrimental for national interest. "If Kumar is punished, after he retires on 31 July as is being speculated, then you can imagine how bad it will be for our officers. They will think twice before sharing any intelligence inputs," the official added.

A visibly tense Home Secretary R.K. Singh, who is retiring on 30 June, recently held a meeting of senior officials including Dharmendra Sharma, who was the Joint Secretary, Internal Security, between 2008 and 2013. "The general opinion is that the permission to prosecute Kumar cannot be given to the CBI. He was doing his job and till now nothing has come up which can prove that he was a part of any conspiracy. The evidence given by CBI against Kumar is not credible enough," an MHA official said.

The MHA, on 9 August 2009, in an affidavit to the Gujarat High Court stated that the four people who were killed were LeT terrorists. It had also objected to the CBI inquiry. However in a second affidavit filed a month later, the MHA changed its stand, stating that intelligence inputs about the persons killed did not constitute conclusive proof. It also supported a CBI probe into the encounter. The CBI is now focusing its attention on the bureaucrats under whom the affidavit was changed. One of the officers, R.V.S. Mani, who submitted the two affidavits, has already been questioned by the agency.

The agency on its part feels that it has enough evidence to nail Kumar and does not need the permission of the MHA. "Let the court decide the culpability of the official. We have enough proof to show his involvement," an agency official stated.

According to officials, seeking such sanction is mandatory under Section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). "Unless and until the Home Ministry gives its sanction, Kumar cannot be prosecuted. The competent authority to grant or deny sanction to prosecute an IPS officer is the MHA," the official added.


Saturday, 29 June 2013

CBI allegations proved false!

By Kartikeya Tanna on June 29, 2013

CBI allegations proved false!
Late last night, a DD News report stated that the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) is not convinced about CBI having proof against the IB officer Rajinder Kumar in the Ishrat Jahan fake encounter case. In order to obtain sanction to prosecute Kumar, CBI had presented evidence against Kumar to the MHA. Upon examining the evidence, the MHA contested CBI’s claim that Kumar was a co-conspirator in the encounter that took place in 2004.

NDTV further reported that the MHA has maintained that IB had launched a covert operation because of which it had been able to penetrate the LeT module well in advance and take preventive action.

These reports fly in the face of CBI’s allegations recently leaked to NDTV and Tehelka that Kumar engineered this entire encounter. Moreover, the NDTV report, if true, reiterates the fact that, according to MHA, Ishrat Jahan and her accomplices were very much a part of the LeT.

Indeed, in MHA’s first affidavit before the Gujarat High Court on August 6, 2009, it had vehemently stated that Ishrat and her aides were carrying out a task assigned to them by the LeT. Although MHA filed another affidavit within two months, on September 30, 2009, one which generated a lot of controversy, it did not retract on the LeT connection of the deceased.

There were actually two operative differences in the later affidavit. The first was an additional submission wherein the MHA stated that simply because agencies provided input to the Gujarat Government on them did not automatically confer on Gujarat police the right to kill them in cold blood. The second was the submission that it had no objections to an independent inquiry being carried out by the CBI or another agency. The latter was the only real 180-degree shift in MHA’s stance.

As readers would recollect, in the first affidavit, MHA had stated (Para 32) that “no proposal for CBI investigation into the case is under the consideration of the Central Government nor does it consider the present case fit for investigation by CBI” [emphasis supplied]. The reason MHA didn’t consider the case fit for CBI probe has been stated in elaborate detail in the affidavit.

Those interested in reading MHA’s first affidavit which outlines critical background details of all four may click here (PDF file).

While this shift in the later affidavit indicates, in a way, the commencement of the “politicisation” of the probe into the Ishrat Jahan encounter case, some facts surrounding the first affidavit are worth understanding.

Back in 2011, an Indian Express report disclosed that this affidavit was cleared for submission by MHA as back as on January 28, 2005, but was not placed before High Court by UPA’s counsel – the Assistant Solicitor General Pankaj Champaneri. As the report further notes, the MHA inquired with Champaneri about the delay, which the latter confirmed. All this is available on MHA files, the report added.

Who told Champaneri to delay filing the affidavit and why he did not file has not been known. The author has learnt that Champaneri is no longer representing the UPA in this matter.

There is another revealing fact which indicates the level of inconvenience the political bosses must have felt due to this affidavit. In 2009, both the DNA and Times of India reported that a senior official in the Law Ministry was removed from his post, possibly due to the embarrassment that this affidavit generated. The reason that sources gave to both these papers was that the Law Ministry was angry that the official had failed to bring the affidavit to its notice.

Who the official was and whether he was given any punishment is not yet known.

However, both facts which remained buried in news archives until now, as well as Friday’s development, reveal a deepening divide between those interested in settling political scores with Modi and those in the Government, particularly in the MHA, who are not very pleased with how the CBI is hounding, and perhaps, destroying the Intelligence Bureau – both in courts and in media.
How this matter plays out in the next few months remains to be seen. The CBI has been asked to file a status report and charge sheet in early July. However, there can be little quarrel with the fact that this proxy political war launched by the Congress has seriously vitiated the CBI probe.


Madhu Kishwar speaks

=> Batla House encounter called false by Diggy raja. Should PM, UPA home minister, Delhi LG & CM be also be tried for murder?

=> Mani Shankar passionate abt panchayati raj. I wish he would recognize Gujarat has given far greater powers to panchayats & with good effect.

=> If all Congress Party left with in Gujarat is an AmI Yagnik & titsy bitsy compromised NGOs\ journalists to defend it, it better close shop!

=> §wami §hivanand & Prof GD Agarwal undertook endless satyagrahi fasts to protect Himalayas from builder mafias. Media paid no heed then.

=> What have they done to Balika Vadhu's once feisty Anandi? Now a petrified plastic doll, bullied, trampled upon even by stupid Sachi I

Dr. Manish Kumar speaks

=> MMS is an imposter.PMO has faltered in Aviation Deal but Poker Faced PM wil never accept because he doesnot know the responsibility of a PM.

=> Why only Political Party? RTI sh be applicable to NGOs,all Pub bodies & most importantly Media too. Media sh tell from where they get money?

=> The Anti-Modi industry is just interested in chargesheeting Modi so that he can't fight election. It was riot cases so far & now its Ishrat.

=> Was the Gujrat Riot the first riot or is the Ishrat's encounter the first one in India? It seems Cong has given up fighting Modi politically

=> Its been 25 Yrs today, when an FIR was lodged against Police for killing 74 people in Maliyana during Meerut Riot: The FIR is still missing.

=> 3 yrs ago CAG had warned that mushrooming hydel projects in uttarakhand were damaging hills & increasing possibility of flash flood. BUT..

=> I was shocked to see hydel project of Jaypee at Joshimath & near Hanumanchatti (areas of max damage) R we selling Ganga to Pvt.Co? What for?

=>  Oh my god... Is the CM & his wife going to switzerland next week? Read it believe it.. …"

=> During Election every political party hire choppers4campaign. Why can't they hire now? To drop foods&rescue thousands of ppl..Pls do it now!

=> Delhi-Flood: Ppl of Usmanpur&BatlaHouse r angry over govt's inaction. Both r muslim majority-areas. Suppose if it was Gujrat or Modi was CM?

- Dr. Manish Kumar

Why Modi’s rescue act backfired, and why it needn’t have

Anand Soondas
29 June 2013, 07:39 PM IST

On June 22, as Narendra Modi held a meeting in Dehradun’s Hotel Madhuban with top BJP leaders and bureaucrats from Gujarat regarding the crisis in Uttarakhand, a party worker, clearly impressed by the relief-and-rescue systems the chief minister had put in place, wanted to talk about it with me. He wasn’t even offering me a story. He was perhaps only hoping that I would be interested enough to write about it.

“Boss, what I have seen here is exceptional,” the man, Uttarakhand’s BJP spokesman Anil Biluni, told me. He was working so closely with Modi perhaps for the first time and was overwhelmed. It was a crowded room in the hotel where the conversation took place – leaders from the state, bureaucrats, security officers were milling around. Everyone had something to say. Modi was next door, still huddled with his people, brainstorming. It was about 8.30pm.

“Ok,” I said, finally. “Tell me about it.” Biluni spoke of the crack rescue team Modi had got together to get Gujaratis out of Uttarakhand. In the group were five IAS, one IPS, one IFS and two GAS (Gujarat Administrative Service) officers. Two DSPs and five police inspectors had also come along. They were all personally coordinating efforts and reporting directly to Modi. The Gujarat team had already para-dropped a couple of medical teams in some of the worst-affected places and set up camps across flood-hit Uttarakhand. Prominent BJP workers at the village and panchayat levels were dealing unhindered with members of the rescue committee, telling them where food, shelter and medicines were needed.

“See,” Biluni excitedly went on, “around 80 Toyota Innovas and 25 buses have been requisitioned to ferry Gujaratis to safer places in Dehradun. There are four Boeings on standby. I think in the past four days we have helped send home 15,000 Gujaratis.’’

The number struck me. “Did you say 15,000?” Biluni answered in the affirmative and said that’s the number those on the field had given him. It is entirely possible that we have helped extend support in terms of reaching food, transport, first aid, even some money, to 15,000 of them, he said, quite earnest. “There were more than 1 lakh pilgrims from Gujarat when the tragedy happened starting June 15.”

Close to 70,000 stranded people had been evacuated by the armed forces by then; many, held up at less dangerous places, had found their way back on their own. It seemed feasible that 15,000 had been given succour by Modi’s team.

The next day, when TOI carried a story on its front page that `Rambo’ Modi had rescued 15,000 Gujaratis (the headline, given by a well-meaning but enthusiastic desk hand, brought sharper attention to the piece), it created a flutter that almost swamped everything else that was being written from Uttarakhand. In the rush of things – I filed the story at around 10.30pm, late by our deadline standards – we made one crucial mistake. We failed to put the figure of 15,000 in single quotes. And because Biluni was quoted in the story, we took it for granted that the number would obviously be attributed to him.

In any case, the point of the story was to talk about Modi’s by now familiar micro-management of things and, two, to hint at the fact that here was the BJP’s prime ministerial candidate looking out for fellow Gujaratis, still trapped by his parochialism.

All hell broke loose and the heavens shook. There were frenzied debates on TV, online participation and a slew of agonized editorials. The BJP, happy till two days after the story appeared, suddenly froze. What was it doing talking about the rescue of Gujaratis as the country was headed for general polls and its man from Gujarat nurtured hopes of becoming the PM? Party president Rajnath Singh suddenly waded into the debate and said he didn’t know where the contentious figure had come from.

I knew about the storm the story had unleashed but was still writing from Uttarakhand. That was when Prashant Jha from The Hindu called me to talk about the article. In another front page write-up, he mentioned the fact, quoting me, that unlike what Rajnath announced, the story had indeed come from the BJP. That set off another round of requests for interviews from papers and magazines regarding the Modi story.

In hindsight, it would have served the BJP better had it owned up to the story. From all accounts, Modi was indeed doing a good job in Uttarakhand. All that the party’s spokespersons needed to say as rejoinder was that with such confusion all around the numbers – 15,000 – could have gone awry a bit on the higher side. That would have taken nothing away from the story. As a senior party leader later said, “It is a fact that thousands have been helped by the Gujarat government. And nowhere are we saying that Modi flew the choppers himself. We are just saying he extended all help that he could to thousands of people.”

Madhu Kishwar a few days later wrote a lead edit piece in The Economic Times, headlined ‘In Defence of Rambo’, and said that the Gujarat CM’s rescue efforts in Uttarakhand was really not aimed at publicity, nor was it a gimmick. She said: “Gujarat today has a fighting-fit bureaucracy because it was enabled to develop expertise, team spirit and deliver results under the most adverse circumstances. The Gujarat Disaster Management Authority (GDMA) has become a thoroughly professional institution capable of responding to natural or man-made disasters. It has a 24×7 monitoring system and well-publicised helpline numbers well known to Gujaratis — both in the country and abroad... That is why the first response of Gujaratis anywhere in the world is to contact the chief minister’s office if they are caught in a calamity.” 

She went on to say: “Also, consider this. Modi arrived in Delhi late 17th night for a meeting with the Planning Commission on 18th when news of cloudburst and landslides was telecast on TV. He held an emergency meeting to take stock of the situation since he knew that thousands of Gujaratis are likely to be among the Chardham pilgrims. Right away, a camp office was opened at Gujarat Bhavan and the Resident Commissioner’s team in Delhi was made responsible for coordinating with Gujarati pilgrims. On the 18th morning, Modi called Dr Pranav Pandya of the All World Gayatri Parivar to provide space and infrastructure in his Shanti Kunj campus for the relief centre proposed to be set up by the Gujarat government. He chose this campus because of his close knowledge of, and rapport with, this Gandhian institution that can house and feed thousands of people at a short notice. On the 18th evening itself, a set of computers with internet connections, telephone lines, television sets and all other paraphernalia required for Gujarat government’s relief operation were set up. Therefore, when a team of Gujarat government IAS, IPS and IFS officers came, they could get going within minutes of reaching Shanti Kunj... Team Gujarat had two officers from Uttarakhand — Assistant Director General of Police Bisht and Forest Service officer SC Pant — who had close knowledge of the terrain to guide both the stranded pilgrims as well as rescue teams on the safest possible routes to take…When Modi landed in Dehradun, Team Gujarat was already in control. Far from attacking the state government, he offered all possible help…officers were provided phone numbers of BJP functionaries of all 190 blocks in Uttarakhand and vice versa... The Congress party is understandably upset because its chief minister has proved a disaster, its party machinery is in disarray, Congress Sewa Dal workers are nowhere in sight, Rahul Gandhi’s Youth Brigade is clueless even in routine situations, leave alone know how to face a crisis like the Uttarakhand deluge. That is the reality of the Uttarakhand relief operation led by Narendra Modi.”

There was also a preposterous insinuation that the Modi story was “fed” by his “public relations agency, an American outfit called Apco Worldwide. In 2007, Apco was hired, ostensibly to boost the Vibrant Gujarat summits, but to actually burnish Modi's image, for $25,000 a month”. The fact is that it happened at a more organic level, the way it happens when reporters are on the ground and begin speaking to the people they trust. Sitting in Delhi, away from the spot and burdened by ideology, columnists quite often lose objectivity or don’t care too much for it. A reporter, provided his integrity is intact, can spot a ‘plant’ a mile away in the first year of his career. 

So that’s that about the Modi story. That it came from one of the BJP’s leaders; that, to be fair to Biluni, he did not try to hardsell it; that in the mad, late night scramble to write the story we missed directly attributing it to the source or putting the said number in quotes; that the party made things worse by pretending they had no idea where all this was coming from; that instead of doing its bit to make Modi look like a hero they unwittingly turned him into the butt of jokes; that in such a charged political atmosphere, what with Modi’s increasing focus on New Delhi, the story acquired wings and dimensions of its own – like the Innovas with helicopter rotors.


Gujaratis not allowed! Uttarakhand survivors recall how they were discriminated during rescue operations

Jun 28, 2013, 13:03PM ISTPHOTOS: Gujaratis not allowed! Uttarakhand survivors recall how they were discriminated during rescue operations
Walsad(Gujarat): Recalling the horror of floods that hit Kedarnath, Walsad's Nainaben Rana feels distressed by the politics being played in the wake of such tragedy. Rana says that during the rescue operations, the Gujaratis were denied entry into the choppers. 
Pushben Patel who safely returned to his hometown in Gujarat recalls how an entire road on which their vehicle was travelling caved in due to pressure of gushing flood waters. 
“The water swept everything away in front of my eyes,” said Radhamohan Soni as he waited to catch a flight back to his hometown, recalling the horror of floods.
In several places, food packets dropped by helicopters were swept away in the river. Many copters returned with the food packets, having found no safe place to drop them.
Narayan Bhai told reporters that Gayatri Pariwar officials assisted them with money and food material. The association having its roots in Haridwar gave Rs. 200 to as many stranded victims they were able to locate, claim many survivors who have returned safely from the flood-hit areas.
We could neither move towards Roopkund nor return to Nainital for four days as all the roads were blocked. After two days, the downpour stopped and the army personnel helped us return to Nainital, Dr. Kulkarni told reporters after safely returning to his ,hometown in Gujarat.

Friday, 28 June 2013

Ishrat Jahan case- naked support to terrorrists

After a Headlines Today broadcast in June 2013, a lot of truth about the Ishrat Jahan encounter has been brought out. But here some concrete things which have been missed. Let us see this case now in totality.
     On 15 June 2004, 4 suspected terrorists were gunned down on the outskirts of Ahmedabad. They included 19 year old Ishrat Jahan and 3 other men, 2 of whom were Pakistani nationals. After that, (as expected) the Leftist liberals in the media started claiming that the encounter was fake and 19-year old Ishrat Jahan was 'innocent' without any evidence to it. Their hatred for Narendra Modi is so much that they simply cannot digest the fact that a 19 year old girl attacked and tried to kill Narendra Modi, and would rather claim that the opposite is true. This howling lasted for a few days. 1 day the Marathi edition of The Indian Express, Loksatta reported on 14 July 2004 headlined: "Yes, Ishrat indeed was a terrorist". The next day Lashkar-e-Toiba admitted on 15 July that Ishrat was indeed its member.

    Immediately after this, the media and the Congress dropped the issue like a hot cake. They did not bother to apologize to Narendra Modi for falsely alleging that the encounter was fake and 'innocent' Ishrat  Jahan was killed. The Samajwadi Party also organised a 'bandh' in Mumbai's Mumbra area in support of Ishrat Jahan before this confession by LeT. S S Vaghela and Congress directly accused Modi of stage managing the encounter. After this confession, the matter died its death. At that time it was urged many times to the Sangh Parivar to attack them- Left-liberal-secular brigade for naked direct support to terrorists, and false allegations on innocent people like Narendra Modi. NCP MLA Jitendra Awhad gave financial compensation to Ishrat Jahan's family also in Mumbai. It was said that cases of treason should be tried for this. This is also violation of 153-A needlessly infuriating a community, defamation of Modi, and naked support to those waging war on the nation. 

   In June 2004 itself, not only the Gujarat Police, but even the Mumbai Police (which works under Congress in Maharashtra) also said that there were sufficient leads to know Ishrat Lahan's LeT links. Note the line in The Indian Express' report of 15 July 2004: "However, Gujarat and Mumbai police had said there were sufficient leads to suspect her involvement in militant activities".
   But after the hullabaloo raised by anti-Narendra Modi people, the Mumbai Police also kept quite on this issue, while in 2004 it had said the opposite. This is a clear indication that under political pressure from Congress and NCP, the anti-terrorist operations of Mumbai Police were curbed and Mumbai Police was forced to give up its drive against the suspected terrorist Ishrat Jahan. Naked support to terrorists and interference in work of police by Congress and NCP for attacking Narendra Modi.
   In October 2004, before the Maharashtra Assembly polls, Samajwadi Party Maharashtra chief Abu Asim Azmi again alleged that 'innocent Ishrat Jahan was killed in cold blood by Modi' and cited this as a case of 'atrocities against Muslims' despite the LeT confession and due to lack of aggressiveness and passiveness, no one did anything. Only once did a former Himachal Pradesh CM write an article in Organiser in October 2004 where he dealed with this and said: "None of them asked the question- if she was innocent, what was she doing with 3 other much older men in a car, 2 of whom were Pakistani nationals, at 4 am in the morning 500 km away from home?"

   Then out of the blue in 2009, Justice Tamang said in a report that the Ishrat Jahan encounter was fake, when it was not his jurisdiction to comment on it. He also said that all people were innocent and had no links to terrorists, ignoring the LeT confession completely. By that time, most people had forgotten this confession. Then the SIT was asked to probe this case, and it is reported to have said that the encounter was fake, without knowing what it said about whether the people were terrorists or not. Then gradually this case was taken up again, with not only the encounter being termed fake, but the girl and 3 others also called 'innocent'.

In 2009 the Centre's (UPAs) affidavit to Gujarat HC was full of contradictions and confusing
In 2010 David Headley also admitted that Ishrat was Lashkar's terrorist.

Then the CBI was given the case and it duly followed its master's orders to frame innocent people and defend the guilty terrorists. Now we have a conflict between CBI and IB over this, and the Headlines Today broadcast proved that they were all indeed terrorists. But politicians like Sharad Pawar again alleged shamelessly that the 19 year old college student Ishrat was innocent and accused Narendra Modi of murdering her- NAKED SUPPORT TO TERRORISTS BY NCP, SHARAD PAWAR. This is blatant violation of 153-A needlessly infuriating a community, 499-500 blatantly fake and phony charges on innocent people, and direct support to terrorists. No less a man than Sharad Pawar has said this.

Now after yesterday's Headlines Today story, NCP MLA Jitendra Awhad, the man who gave compensation in 2004, alleged actually that the IB is on BJP's orders and IB is not above law. This is another dangerous trend, a public representative making such terrible charges against IB which is also headed by a Muslim.

Jitendra Awhad and Sharad Pawar are wrong on facts also. The Mumbai Police also said that there were sufficient leads to zero in on Ishrat. This police works under the Home Ministry of the state, which is held by their own party NCP.

   Now it is urged not to repeat the mistake made in 2004. File cases against them, people like Sharad Pawar and NCP. This issue should be used politically, this will also expose people who can go to any extent to malign Narendra Modi. The big fish Sharad Pawar should not be spared, nor should Jitendra Awhad. Shankarsinh Vaghela, Congress, Abu Asim Azmi etc all are equally guilty.
And since they know they are on a very weak wicket, the judge seeing this case in the Gujarat High Court is Abhilasha Kumari, daughter of Congress Chief Minister of Himachal Pradesh, Virbhadra Singh. This shows how deep and complex the trap has been set to frame innocents and defend the guilty. 

CBI-Parrot should repeat Ishrat-Diary Code Words Advani(Lala), Modi(Mubarak),Thakeray(kutta), Katiyar(kanta), Togadia(Tinku)

By Premendra Agrawal at June 28, 2013 21:50

As media reported in June 2004: The telephone tapes and diary of gunned down terrorist girl Ishrat revealed these codes: Advani was ‘Lala’, Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi was ‘Mubarak’, Vishwa Hindu Parishad Secretary General Dr Pravin Togadia was ‘Tinku’, Shiv Sena leader Bal Thackeray was ‘Kutta’, Uttar Pradesh BJP president Vinay Katiyar was ‘Kanta’ and Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Uma Bharti was ‘Behenji’. Delhi was ‘Maika’ and Ahmedabad, ‘Sasural.’They wanted to kill these leaders because they viewed them as enemies of Islam.

he Gujarat Police on claimed it had 'clinching' evidence in the diary of Ishrat Jahan Sheikh to prove that she and Javed Sheikh, two of the four alleged Lashkar terfrorists killed in an encounter in Ahmedabad on June 15, were involved in terrorist activities and received Rs 480,000.
"Ishrat's diary has a detailed handwritten account of financial transactions, including receiving Rs 480,000 and that she passed Rs 106,000 of it to Salim, one of the Pakistani terrorists killed with her," Additional Commissioner of Police (Crime Branch) D G Vanjhara told PTI.
The police claimed to back all this evidence with a tape recorded "confession" of Ishrat's mother Shamima Shaikh, who was grilled by crime branch when she had come to collect her daughter's body two days ago.
Transcripts of her interrogation had been released to media.
The diary also contained information about reconnaissance conducted by her and Javed of some persons houses, whose names are not mentioned but just some coded alphabets, the ACP said.
Ishrat, Javed and two Pakistani nationals, all alleged LeT militants sent to assassinate Chief Minister Narendra Modi, were shot dead in an encounter with crime branch personnel in the wee hours on June 15.
Officials had recovered an AK-56 rifle, a satellite phone, material for making explosives and cash.

Mr. Vanjhara said that Ishrat along with Javed had earlier come to Ahmedabad twice and the last time they came here, on May 13, they stayed at the Shivganga hotel. They visited Gandhinagar to study the movements of the Chief Minister, Narendra Modi, the security arrangements around his residence and his offices and the routes he took to reach the Secretariat. Police have seized the register of the hotel.
During the last month, Salim had been staying at Ishrat's residence in Mumbra and her mother was aware of his identity. Contrary to what she told the media, she had admitted before police that Ishrat had left home with Javed at least twice earlier. She had stayed away for about seven days at one time. Ishrat(dead in encounter) had told her mother that she had gone to Lucknow and stayed with Javed's relatives.

Mr. Vanjahara said that police had recovered proof of "oral, written and circumstantial evidences" to establish Ishrat's relationship with Javed and their close links with the alleged Pakistani terrorists.


Rs. One Lakh to Ishrat’s Mother calling her Martyr in 2004, now again

By Premendra Agrawal at June 28, 2013 20:18

CBI preparing itself to make Ishrat a martyr as demanded  by Congress in 2004. 
Ex-Congress spokesperson Singhvi said: ``no one could be more tainted than Narendra Modi. Gujarat police is communal,’’ In live-telecast Big fight of NDTV, Hasan Johar, a so called human right activist said that the persons, those came to kill Narendra Modi in revenge, should be called killers, but not terrorists.” 

Congress had already made martyr to Ishrat travelling with terrorist in a mission. So now Congress is doing the same to see the coming election. Terrorists, Separists, Maoiss, Criminals, secularism sellers are the vote bank and supporters of the Congress.

Terrorist Girl on June 19, 2004 Ishrat became Martyr? Now CBI is fulfilling their wish!
Nationalist Congress Party MLA Vasant Davkhare who had been the deputy speaker in Maharashtra Legislative Council, gave one lac cheque the mother of terrorist Ishrat Jahan, who was part of an alleged mission to kill Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi.

At the funeral, local political leaders were seen collecting donations for the family since Ishrat was the main breadwinner of the household.

Hussain Dalwai of the Congress, who attended the funeral, said such encounters were staged to defame the minority community.
The entire incident has put the Narendra Modi led Gujarat Government under a cloud of doubt, he alleged. He also demanded that other cases like that involving Khwaja Yunus should be probed thoroughly.

This incident exposed the media, politicians, NGOs, human rights activist who consistently criticizes to evoke communal sentiments for their own selfish benefits. (Examples: A certain politician donated a chunk of money to her family, lots of people gathering for her funeral, etc. even without bothering to know the truth if she was linked with terrorists or not)

Secular Media electronic media especially NDTV was giving judgment to make Ishrat a martyr and to label Modi, Gujarat Govt., Police and judiciary murderer of Ishrat.

English News paper wrote an editorial that case against Gujarat police should be registered. To gun down terrorist was against the human right.

Gujarat High Court has said in its judgment, ‘‘it appears that attempt is being made by journalist/human right activist and advocates Teesta Setalvad and Mihir Desai to have a parallel investigation. We do not know how far it is proper but we can state that it is not permissible under law.’’

*Update on June 28, 2013 / my article/ 7 years ago/

'Gujarat govt has shown it is very good at disaster management'

June 24, 2013 13:48 IST

The evacuation of 15,000 Gujarati pilgrims following the visit to rain-devastated Uttarakhand by Chief Minister Narendra Modi has become the talk of the town. While the Bharatiya Janata Party cannot stop singing praises of its newly-appointed Lok Sabha poll campaign chief for this operation, the Congress, on the other hand, has termed it as an act of “opportunism and selfishness”.

For the BJP unit in Uttarakhand, Modi's rescue mission has come as a shot in the arm. The manner in which the entire operation was planned and executed should be applied as a role model for other states, the party points out.

Uttarakhand BJP spokesperson Anil Baluni, who was also the former vice-chairperson of the state forest and environment advisory committee, spoke with about the operation carried out by Modi and his team.

“This is the season when the number of Gujarati pilgrims is the highest. Almost 25 per cent of the pilgrims are from Gujarat at this time. When the tragedy first struck, the Gujarat government sought to know the exact numbers. They geared themselves up since day one and did not waste time, and proved that they are very good at disaster management. Their approach was systematic since day one,” Baluni said.

“The first thing the Gujarat government did was to appoint a relief commissioner, Poonam Singh Pandey. They then decided to use the BJP network in Uttarakhand and reached out to each unit seeking help. They sent in four officers in the ranks of IAS and IPS to oversee the work and assist the relief commissioner. Each of these officers who were sent in was originally from Uttarakhand but was working in the Gujarat cadre. This was done to ensure that there was no problem where the locations or the language was concerned. They were able to converse and move around with ease since they were familiar with the place and this helped a lot in the rescue operation,” Baluni noted.

“This team spread across the state. Their phone numbers were shared with BJP workers in the state who were told that the numbers should be shared with the pilgrims who could get in touch with the relief commissioner directly. This made it very easy to communicate, as a result of which the rescue operation was successful. Along with planes, the government of Gujarat also sent in 100 buses to rescue the pilgrims. All the workers were told that the pilgrims who were caught up should be provided food and water until the rescue team reaches there,” he said.

“What Modi did was stunning and he decided to station himself in the flood-affected state for three days. This acted as a boon for all. The officers on the job were charged up and the fact that Modi was directly in contact with the workers charged up the entire team. This automatically gave us a lot of enthusiasm. Modi not only inspected the areas personally but also spoke to each of the workers despite all the danger. Unlike some Congress leaders he did not sit in Delhi and tweet about the operation or mock the rest who were doing work,” he added.

Image: Gujarat Chief Minister Narendra Modi


Ishrat Jahan case: Is the CBI succumbing to dirty politics?

June 24, 2013 16:57 IST
The CBI-IB tussle in the Ishrat Jahan encounter case is an avoidable conflict, says V G Vaidya

The Congress in half panic following the Narendra Modi juggernaut… the Janata Dal-United deserting the National Democratic Alliance in a struggle to preserve its secular fig leaf… the Bharatiya Janata Party jettisoning the L K Advani burden…; the media could not have asked for a headier cocktail in the run up for the next general election.
Yet it got more! And the press expose of the Central Bureau of Investigation probe into the alleged ‘fake encounter’ killing of Ishrat Jahan produced the requisite punch. The CBI went to the extent of implicating a very senior officer of the Intelligence Bureau.

Investigating under the scrutiny of the Gujarat high court, one can understand CBI’s anxiety to provide a fool proof case. But in doing so it apparently went overboard forgetting that it also ought to have displayed certain professional etiquette and finesse. It proceeded to interrogate the officer of the IB to establish, what it perceived was his complicity and excessive involvement leading to the alleged fake encounter that killed Ishrat along with three others. The CBI’s actions received (or inspired) media publicity pitting the two vital security outfits of the country against each other. This is nothing short of a disaster.

The IB, the Research and Analysis Wing, the CBI and other security agencies are members of a security family of the country. In the course of their functioning it is natural and possible for any of them to tread on the other’s toes. In such eventuality it is incumbent upon their leadership to put their heads together and iron out the differences. The offices of the heads of IB and the CBI are just 50 metres apart in the same corridor of the home ministry in New Delhi. It was possible for the director, CBI to informally get in touch with his IB counterpart, discuss an IB officer’s alleged involvement they suspected and deal with the case with adequate finesse, maturity and professionalism. But no, it seems this did not happen.

On the other hand the CBIs actions became public and appeared daily in the press. And, unfortunately, it even defended its line of investigation before the press claiming that it had definite proof of the IB officer’s complicity in the case. It went as far as to draw adverse inferences from his frequent contacts with Gujarat government functionaries and alleged his ‘generating’ the desired intelligence leading to the encounter. The arguments supporting such insinuations are ridiculous, to say the least.

It needs to be appreciated that IB’s sharing of intelligence with concerned ministries or security agencies is a very delicate matter. According to the GoI’s rules of business, need to ensure security of the source as also professional requirement, the director, IB is neither bound nor required to reveal the sources of his information. Nobody can ask for it. It is a matter of common sense that if this rule is not followed the entire intelligence network in the country will collapse.

Viewed against this background one wonders how the CBI, an agency working under and following the same security philosophy, proceeded to question the IB officer about Ishrat Jehan (with whom he nursed no prejudice or enmity). Who gave the dubious go ahead to the CBI to take this path?
Another, very crucial fact to be clearly understood, is that IB is a purely inquiry outfit. It does not have police powers. It works through its informers, agents and other technical tools to collect information having bearing on national security. This is one of the reasons why its findings are viewed with respect and credibility. Once the clues relating to national security are processed and found credible the IB provides them to the concerned agencies for further follow up actions.

Now, in these follow ups it is natural, and even necessary for the IB to liaise with that agency. In the Ishrat Jahan case the very life of Gujarat CM Narendra Modi was involved. IB’s joint directors in charge of its field units in the states do not work under the concerned chief ministers; nor are they answerable to the CM. They however do maintain contacts with the CM and the state police which is a professional requirement. Political loyalties of the CM are irrelevant.

The joint director functions under exclusive control and guidance of the IB headquarters. So, what is criminal or wrong in maintaining such a contact in this case? The CBI drawing farfetched inferences are simply crazy.

It is well known that police officers are reluctant to work in the CID or the IB. Also there is a general reluctance to go on deputation to the central government. Added to that, the IB is very selective and meticulous in choosing IPS officers for such deputations. The organisation therefore functions on the professional competence and dedication of those who stick to it. They have professional pride and not given to such ‘concoctions’ which the CBI has alleged. That is why intelligence agencies in other countries have respectful regards for it (howsoever much we may condemn it at home).

If in the context of this disturbing reality we keep hounding out IB officers its rank and file will soon lose their motivation and enthusiasm for delicate and challenging intelligence operations. Can the country afford it? Just for comparison sake, see how the US is defending its ‘snooping’ operations. Well, the country which prides on its intelligence geniuses has now come to such a sorry pass. It is necessary for the prime minister to step in and firmly curb this trend. Will he?

Reverting to the Ishrat Jehan case, the CBI got a rap on its knuckles on June 14 when the Gujarat high court advised it to concentrate on finding out the genuineness or otherwise of the encounter rather than wasting its energies over IB’s degree of involvement in it.

The case occurred in 2004. From where and how comes this sudden burst of investigative activity on CBI’s part when the country is on the threshold of a general election? (Remember CBI was called a parrot recently)? Politicians have enough issues to exploit in the pre-election free for all. They would be better advised to stay away from this one for the country’s sake. But do they listen? No chance. For them the vote bank is of paramount importance as of now.

V G Vaidya is former director, IB. His email:

V G Vaidya

A 10-Step Program for India’s Economy

June 23, 2013 6:00 PM EDT

It’s fashionable to say the era of strong emerging-market growth is over. As the U.S. recovers, the global cost of capital will rise, holding back investment; against this background, avoiding the next crisis is the best that most emerging economies can do. If you take this view, India might seem a perfect example, with its widening current account deficit, heavy public borrowing, persistent inflation and weak currency.

I don’t think so. As a general matter, emerging-market gloom is overdone. India, in particular, could teach the pessimists a lesson.

Last week, I made a quick visit to see the chief minister of Gujarat, Narendra Modi. He’d asked me to give a presentation on how India could realize its still-enormous potential. I went through points I’d first discussed in a paper I co-wrote with Tushar Poddar in 2008: Ten Things for India to Achieve its 2050 Potential. It’s striking to me that, five years later, our recommendations don’t need revising. (They do need elaborating, and I’ll get into more detail in an updated study and further columns. Modi and I are planning a conference of experts before the end of this year.)

I’ll state no opinion on Modi’s chances of becoming prime minister after next year’s general election -- it has been announced that he’ll lead the opposition Bharatiya Janata Party’s campaign. He’s a controversial figure. Detractors call him a sectarian extremist. I will say this: He’s good on economics, and that’s one of the things India desperately needs in a leader.

Cultivating Growth

Like all Indians, Modi loves acronyms. Me too. I admire his MG-squared -- minimum government, maximum governance -- and P2G2 -- pro-active, pro-people, good governance. That sums it up pretty well. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that Gujarat has avoided the slowdown that has almost halved India’s national rate of growth. The state just keeps on growing at double-digit rates.

Long-term growth depends ultimately on just two things -- the number of workers and how productive they are. India’s demographics are remarkable. The country is on track to grow its workforce by 140 million between 2000 and 2020. That increase is the equivalent of the working population of France, Germany, Italy and the U.K. combined.

Even with unspectacular growth of a little more than 6 percent a year, India’s economy could be 40 times bigger by 2050 than it was in 2000 -- about as big as the U.S. economy will probably be by then (though not as big as China). But it could do so much better than that. Growth of 8.5 percent over the entire period is possible -- with growth of more than 10 percent over the next 15 to 20 years not out of the question -- provided it makes some changes.

It’s all about productivity. India scores poorly on indexes of economic variables that are critical for economic efficiency -- worse than Brazil, China and even Russia. To change that, it needs to do 10 things:

1. Improve its governance. This is probably the hardest and most important task -- the precondition for the rest. Modi is right: Whoever leads the next government in 2014, India needs maximum governance and minimum government. There is no point having the world’s largest democracy unless it leads to effective government.

2. Fix primary and secondary education. There has been some progress here, but a huge number of young people still get little or no schooling. I sit on the board of Teach for All, a global umbrella organization for groups that encourage the brightest graduates to spend at least two years teaching. Today India has about 350 teachers in these programs. It could do with 350,000 or more.

3. Improve colleges and universities. India has too few excellent institutions. Its share of places in the Shanghai ranking of the world’s top universities should be proportional to its share of global gross domestic product -- meaning 10 universities in the top 500 (it currently has just one). Make that an official goal.

4. Adopt an inflation target, and make it the center of a new macroeconomic policy framework.

5. Introduce a medium to long-term fiscal-policy framework, perhaps with ceilings as in the Maastricht Treaty -- a deficit of less than 3 percent of GDP and debt of less than 60 percent of GDP.

6. Increase trade with its neighbors. Indian exports to China could be close to $1 trillion by 2050, almost the size of its entire GDP in 2008. But India has little trade with Bangladesh and Pakistan. There’s no better way to promote peaceful relations than to expand trade -- and that means imports as well as exports.

7. Liberalize financial markets. India needs huge amounts of domestic and foreign capital to achieve its potential -- and a better-functioning capital market to allocate it wisely.

8. Innovate in farming. Gujarat isn’t a traditional agricultural producer, but it has improved productivity with initiatives like its “white revolution” in milk production. The whole nation, still greatly dependent on farming, needs enormous improvements.

9. Build more infrastructure. I flew in to Ahmedabad via Delhi, and out via Mumbai, all in a day. I got where I needed to go -- but it’s obvious how much more India needs to do. Adopt some of that Chinese drive to invest in infrastructure.

10. Protect the environment. India can’t achieve 8.5 percent growth for the next 30 to 40 years unless it takes steps to safeguard environmental quality and use energy and other resources more efficiently. Encouraging the private sector to invest in sustainable technologies can boost growth in its own right.
I’ll have a lot more to say about the details as this project moves forward. For now, suffice to say that India’s potential is vast -- and given the will, it can be tapped.

(Jim O’Neill, former chairman of Goldman Sachs Asset Management, is a Bloomberg View columnist.)

To contact the writer of this article: Jim O’Neill at
To contact the editor responsible for this article: Clive Crook at

Allegations of NDTV’s Many Shenanigans

Sucheta Dalal | 24/06/2013 11:13 AM

NDTV,Parliament,Shenanigans,Goldman Sachs, Parliament, investor,Mr Dutt,Prannoy Roy,

Sanjay Dutt, director of Quantum Securities and a long-term shareholder of NDTV has alleged that chairman Prannoy Roy received irregular promoter funding of Rs375 crore by pledging NDTV shares which, according to him, is against the RBI rules

In August 2011, Moneylife wrote: “NDTV got listed in 2004 and is trading below its listed price after seven years. It has given a negative return of 19% compounded in the past five years and a total shareholder return (TSR) of negative 66% for the same period. Its viewership claims, like those of all TV channels, are impossible to verify. Its credibility is at a nadir (after the recent phone-tapping controversy) and its finances are in a mess. NDTV has rarely made money from operations. For the past few years, its consolidated operations have been making cash losses and it has been running on money made by selling loss-making subsidiaries to strategic investors.”

We further pointed out how marquee institutional investors always line up to acquire this loss-making company’s bits and pieces and exit at a loss at regular intervals, only to make way for other big name investors! The latest was DE Shaw which provided an exit to Goldman Sachs in 2011 by acquiring a 14.2% stake. After this, NDTV acquired a significant investor—Abhay Oswal, who owns nearly 15% of its equity but seems to have no presence on NDTV’s board of directors. Mr Oswal happens to be the father-in-law of Navin Jindal, an industrialist and Congress Member of Parliament.

In all these years, no investor has complained, or uttered a word of public criticism, about the losses and operations of this strange company. But, a few weeks ago, Moneylife received an email from Sanjay Dutt, director of Quantum Securities P Ltd, a name familiar to all those who watch the business TV regularly. Mr Dutt said that his firm is a long-term shareholder of NDTV and holds over 1% of its equity capital. He also disclosed that he had worked as a consultant with the group from 2006 to 2008 and has been a personal friend of the current CEO for over 15 years. But, more about that later. Mr Dutt was writing to make some startling allegations about NDTV’s capital ...


Autonomy to CBI: 'The parrot is back in the cage'

Last updated on: June 28, 2013 12:20 IST
The suggestion to grant autonomy to the Central Bureau of Investigation has been approved by the Union Cabinet, but a former director of the premier agency feels that it is a hoax and the “parrot will remain in the cage”.

Former CBI director Joginder Singh says that it is nothing but a hoax and the measures that have been suggested to give the agency autonomy will not help in the long run.

“The proposal to set up a panel of judges to oversee the investigations will not help in my view. The CBI will be under these judges and in my view there is no autonomy in this move and the parrot will be back in the cage,” Singh says.

“The Supreme Court had said during a hearing on May 6that the CBI has become a caged parrot. We can't have CBI as a caged parrot speaking in its master's voice. It is a sordid saga where there are many masters and one parrot,” he adds.

Singh points out that while these measures adopted by the government will be part of the affidavit before the Supreme Court which has sought a change, there is nothing to indicate that the CBI will not be under the control of the government.

“The real problem lies there. Where is the autonomy in this respect? It is nothing but a bogus move and I really wish that someone does file a public interest litigation challenging this move by the government.

“If the government is really serious about giving autonomy to the CBI, then it should be granted the status of the Election Commission of India, the Central Vigilance Commission or the Comptroller and Auditor General. These bodies have a proper autonomy and are not under the control of the government. We have seen that they are able to work independently without being caged or having several masters to control them. What is the harm in giving the CBI such a status? Moreover this business of sanction in cases of corruption ought to be taken away and the CBI should take a suo motu call on the same. Why I say that sanction should not be there in such cases is because corruption is not anyone’s business and such persons need to be dealt with.

“I do agree that people may fear that the CBI will become all powerful if such autonomy is granted. Why doesn’t one think that the ECI, CAG, CVC and also the Supreme Court has such autonomy? One must understand that giving autonomy does not mean that the agency will not work under the law. They are bound by the provisions of our law and they cannot divert from that. Moreover if anyone is aggrieved by an impugned action then they always have a right of appeal before the high court and also Supreme Court. Hence there is nothing really to worry about,” Singh notes.

Image: Former CBI Director Joginder Singh