On June 8, 2006, Zakiya Jaffri, widow of the late member
of parliament, Ahsan Jaffri, sought to register a first information report
(FIR) against Chief Minister Narendra Modi and 62 others, including
cabinet ministers, senior bureaucrats and policemen, under section 154 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure. Needless to say, the Gujarat police had
failed to register such an FIR though cognisable offences have been made
out therein. Therefore, on March 1, 2007 the complainant and Citizens for
Justice and Peace jointly filed a writ petition in the Gujarat High Court
asking the court to issue orders so that such an FIR may be registered.
Moreover, given the state complicity at the highest level, they have
demanded that the entire investigation is handed over to an independent
agency, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).
We list below the details of the criminal charges made out
in the complaint and the petition. Due to constraints of space, some of
these charges have been condensed here. Full details can be accessed at
Evidence in support of the charges
1. Instructions to the director general of police (DGP),
the chief secretary and other senior officials to give vent to the Hindu
anger against minority Muslims in the wake of the Godhra incident. Meeting
held in Gandhinagar on the evening of February 27, 2002, as testified in
Affidavit No. 4 dated October 27, 2005 of additional director general of
police (ADGP), RB Sreekumar, before the Nanavati-Shah Commission.
2. The chief minister (CM)’s decision to bring dead
bodies of those killed in the Godhra train fire to Ahmedabad and parade
them in Ahmedabad city, as testified by Ashok Narayan, former addl. chief
secretary, home department, in his cross-examination before the Nanavati-Shah
3. Numerous illegal instructions given verbally to
officials as detailed in Affidavit No. 3 dated April 9, 2005 of RB
Sreekumar before the Nanavati-Shah Commission (Annexure F).
4. Evidence contained in Crime Against Humanity,
Concerned Citizens Tribunal report, Gujarat 2002, by a panel of judges,
Justices VR Krishna Iyer, PB Sawant and others, which included testimonies
of officials and a cabinet minister of the state of Gujarat.
5. Positioning cabinet ministers, IK Jadeja and Ashok
Bhatt, in the DGP’s office and Ahmedabad city control room respectively.
DGP Chakravarti was critical of the minister, IK Jadeja, remaining in his
office, as testified by RB Sreekumar in para 85 of his fourth affidavit
before the Nanavati-Shah Commission.
6. Transfer of officers from field executive posts in
the thick of the riots in 2002 despite the DGP’s objections (as per media
reports), to facilitate placement of those who were willing to subvert the
system for political and electoral benefits.
7. Rewarding of senior officials with undue benefits
even while their conduct is under scrutiny at the Nanavati-Shah
Commission. The latest instance was the six-month extension as state
vigilance commissioner awarded to Ashok Narayan, who has already completed
two years in the above post-retirement placement. The orders were issued
on July 28, 2006.
8. No follow-up action on the reports sent by RB
Sreekumar on April 24, 2002, June 15, 2002, August 20, 2002 and August 28,
2002 about the administration’s anti-minority stance. Copies of these
reports are appended in Affidavit No. 2 dated October 6, 2004 of RB
Sreekumar before the Nanavati-Shah Commission.
9. Indictment by the Supreme Court about the
injustices carried out against the minority community and riot victims in
the investigation of riot cases in respect of 1) the Bilkees Bano case, 2)
the Best Bakery case.
10. Partisan investigations betraying prejudice
against riot victims belonging to the minority community, as indicated by
Rahul Sharma, the then superintendent of police (SP), Bhavnagar district,
and now SP (CBI), Gandhinagar, during his cross-examination before the
11. The CM, Narendra Modi, did not visit the riot
affected areas during the initial days of the violence though he visited
the Godhra railway station on February 27, 2002 itself.
12. The press statement by Narendra Modi that the
reaction against the Muslim community was the operation of Newton’s law of
action and reaction.
13. No direction from Narendra Modi to Hindu
organisations against the observance of a bandh on February 28,
2002. (In 1997 and subsequently, the Kerala High Court has declared forced
bandhs illegal; the 1997 verdict was even upheld by the Supreme
14. Delay in the requisition and deployment of the
army although anti-minority violence had broken out on the afternoon of
February 27, 2002 itself, in the cities of Vadodara, Ahmedabad, etc.
15. Appointment of pro-VHP advocates as public
prosecutors in riot cases though as home minister (cabinet rank) the CM
had the necessary means at his disposal to verify the credentials and
integrity of these advocates.
16. Refusal to transfer officers from the grass root
level, as per the State Intelligence Bureau (SIB)’s recommendation, until
the arrival of KPS Gill as security adviser to the CM in May 2002. Gill
ensured the above transfers and this led to a dramatic improvement in the
situation, as indicated in RB Sreekumar’s second affidavit before the
17. No action taken against the print media carrying
communally inflammatory reports although the SIB and some field officers
had recommended such action, as noted in Affidavit No. 1 of RB Sreekumar
dated July 6, 2002 and during his cross-examination before the Nanavati-Shah
Commission on August 31, 2004. (It is the state home department that is
empowered to give clearance for initiating action against the print
18. The state home department provided misleading
reports about normalcy in the state to the Chief Election Commission (CEC)
so as to ensure early assembly elections. The home department’s assessment
was adjudged as false by the CEC in its open order dated August 16, 2002.
As per the register recording verbal instructions from higher echelons of
government (the CM and others) maintained by RB Sreekumar, in his third
affidavit before the Nanavati-Shah Commission it is noted that he was
directed by home department officials to give favourable reports about the
law and order situation so as to facilitate the holding of early
19. State secretary, home department, GC Murmu, was
presumably specially assigned to tutor, cajole and even intimidate
officials deposing before the Nanavati-Shah Commission, to prevent them
from telling the truth and harming the interests of the CM and the ruling
party, as noted in RB Sreekumar’s third affidavit before the Nanavati-Shah
20. GC Murmu’s mission was to try and ensure that
officials did not file affidavits relating to the second term of reference
of the Nanavati-Shah Commission, in particular, the role of the CM and
other ministers in the riots.
21. Initiating no action against senior police
officers, whose work is administered by the home department, for their
grave dereliction of duty in the supervision of the investigation of
serious offences as envisaged in Rules 24, 134, 135 and 240 of the Gujarat
Police Manual-Vol. III, as noted in para 94 of RB Sreekumar’s fourth
affidavit before the Nanavati-Shah Commission.
22. Did not initiate departmental action against the
then SP of Dahod district, SP Jadeja, for his gross misconduct and
negligence during investigations into the Bilkees Bano case despite
recommendations to that effect by the CBI which reinvestigated the case as
per the directions of the Supreme Court.
23. Investigating officers in the Naroda Patiya and
the Gulberg Society cases did not investigate the compact disc (CD)
containing records of important telephone calls made by Bharatiya Janata
Party (BJP) leaders and police officers during the riots. Rahul Sharma, SP
(CBI), had submitted this CD to the Nanavati-Shah Commission in 2004. In
May 2007 the commission ordered an inquiry into this matter, as per media
24. A situation conducive to the rehabilitation of
riot victims has not been created, contrary to the claims made by the
state administration in its reports to the National Human Rights
Commission. Instead, riot victims were pressurised into compromising with
the perpetrators of the violence as a condition precedent for their safe
return to their homes and their rehabilitation.
25. Police inaction on investigating the roots and
extent of the criminal conspiracy, linked to their participation in it.
26. No minutes or written notes of the meetings held
by the CM and senior bureaucrats were issued, and instructions were mainly
conveyed on the telephone. The non-issuance of such minutes/notes served
the twin objectives of 1) Field officers carrying out the conspiracy of a
pogrom against the minority and 2) Avoidance of subsequent monitoring of
actions by jurisdictional officers in the field.
27. No action has been taken against officers like K.
Chakravarti, then DGP; PC Pande, then commissioner of police (CP),
Ahmedabad city; Ashok Narayan, then addl. chief secretary, and a large
number of senior government functionaries who filed incomplete,
inaccurate, vague and inadequate affidavits before the Nanavati-Shah
Commission. Virtually no officer provided important documents relevant to
the terms of reference of the commission as exhibits either in affidavits
or during their cross-examination.
28. Slack review of post-riot cases, a review ordered
by the Supreme Court in 2004. This was achieved by entrusting the work to
those senior officers who were willing or constrained to act according to
the political interests of the CM and the BJP.
29. Nepotism practised in postings, transfers,
promotions, etc despite mounting vacancies in police departments so as to
facilitate the ongoing subversion of the criminal justice system.
30. The fact that the main victims of the riots were
Muslims, and the violence and police firing were targeted predominantly at
the Muslim community will establish that rioters, the administration,
cohorts of the ruling party (BJP), were working in collaboration to
achieve the vile objectives of the CM. Statistics in this respect may be
seen in RB Sreekumar’s second affidavit before the Nanavati-Shah
Commission, particularly in para 3 of Appendix V therein.
The nature of offences detailed and the quantum of
evidence delineated above categorically establish that the accused No. 1,
Chief Minister Narendra Modi, had violated and has been violating his oath
of allegiance to the Constitution of India. Further, through a series of
preconceived, and pre-planned illegal actions, he carried out and has been
pursuing actions challenging, violating and subverting the letter, spirit
and ethos of the Constitution. This sinister design has been implemented
by means of the malevolent use of the human and material resources under
his command, by virtue of his position as chief minister. Activists,
collaborators and supporters of the ruling party – BJP – and its feeder
and sister organisations have been motivated, equipped and directed by the
accused for the perpetration of crimes as listed above. In other words,
the accused has been waging a war against the true sovereignty of the
Indian nation, "We, the people", as etched in the first line of the
Preamble to the Constitution of India. The deliberate acts of omission and
commission by the accused, individually and through his active
collaborators in the state administration and the BJP’s party bodies,
violate the basic and inviolable structure of Indian polity as envisioned
in the preamble to the Constitution.
From this perspective, the accused had and has been
committing seditious acts, which had and will have a divisive,
degenerative and debilitative impact on Indian society and on the unity
and integrity of the Indian nation in the long term.
Acc. No. 2: Ashok Bhatt, in 2002, Minister for Health,
currently Minister for Law and Justice, Health and Family Welfare,
Legislative & Parliamentary Affairs, NGOs, etc.
Acc. No. 3: Indravijaysinh K. Jadeja, in 2002,
Minister for Urban Development, currently Minister for Roads & Buildings,
Capital Projects, Urban Development and Urban Housing.
Acc. No. 4: Prabhatsinh P. Chauhan, in 2002, Minister
for Transport, currently Minister (MoS) for Tribal Development and MLA
from Kalol, Gandhinagar district.
Acc. No. 5: Gordhan Zadaphiya, in 2002 an MLA
and Minister for Home, currently an MLA from Rakhial, Ahmedabad.
Acc. No. 6: Ranjitsingh N. Chawda, in 2002 an MLA and
Minister for Cottage Industries and Shri Vajpayee Swarojgar Yojna.
Acc. No. 7: Kaushikkumar J. Patel, in 2002, Minister
for Energy and MLA from Shahpur, Ahmedabad, currently Minister for Revenue
and Disaster Management.
Acc. No. 8: CD Patel, in 2002 an MLA from Petlad,
Anand district, currently Minister (MoS) for Tourism, Holy Places &
Pilgrimage Development (Ind. Charge), etc.
Acc. No. 9: Nitin R. Patel, in 2002 an MLA from Kadi,
Mehsana and Minister for Finance.
Acc. No. 10: Amit A. Shah, currently Minister (MoS)
for Home, Police Housing, Border Security, Jails, Prohibition, Excise
(Ind. Charge) and Transport, and MLA from Sarkhej, Ahmedabad.
Acc. No. 11: Anil T. Patel, (of the Apollo Group)
currently Minister (MoS) for Civil Aviation, Cottage and Salt Industry
(Ind. Charge), Industry, Mines and Minerals, and MLA from Mehsana.
Acc. No. 12: Narayan L. Patel, in 2002, Minister for
Transport (Ind. Charge), currently an MLA from Unjha, Mehsana district.
Acc. No. 13: Kalu H. Maliwad, in 2002 an MLA from
Lunawada, former taluka Panchayat Pramukh, currently an MLA from
Lunawada, Panchmahal district.
Acc. No. 14: Dilip M. Patel, in 2002 an MLA, currently
an MLA from Anand Vidhyanagar, Anand district.
Acc. No. 15: Madhu B. Srivastava, in 2002 an MLA and
currently an MLA from Waghodiya, Vadodara.
Acc. No. 16: Dr (Ms) Maya Kodnani, in 2002 and
currently an MLA from Naroda, Ahmedabad.
Acc. No. 17: Nalin K. Bhatt, former General Secretary,
BJP. Author of the party’s affidavit before the Nanavati-Shah Commission.
Acc. No. 18: Rajendra Singh Rana, in 2002 and
currently MP from Bhavnagar. Spokesperson of the BJP.
Acc. No. 19: Dr Kaushik J. Mehta, Joint Secretary,
Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), Gujarat.
Acc. No. 20: Dr Praveen Togadia, in 2002 and
currently, International General Secretary, VHP.
Acc. No. 21: Dr Jaideep Patel, Gujarat Secretary, VHP.
Acc. No. 22: Babu Bajrangi Patel, Member, Bajrang Dal
and VHP, Ahmedabad.
Acc. No. 23: Prof KK Shastri, Chairman, VHP, Gujarat
unit, and Editor, Viswa Hindu Samachar.
Acc. No. 24: Babu Rajput, BJP worker, Ahmedabad.
Acc. No. 25: K. Chakravarti, in 2002, DGP,
Gujarat, now retired.
Acc. No. 26: AK Bhargava, former DGP, Gujarat,
currently Managing Director (MD), Gujarat State Police Housing Corporation
Acc. No. 27: G. Subbarao, in 2002, Chief Secretary,
Government of Gujarat, currently Chairman, Gujarat Electricity Regulatory
Acc. No. 28: Ashok Narayan, in 2002, Addl. Chief
Secretary (Home), Government of Gujarat, currently Gujarat State Vigilance
Acc. No. 29: PC Pande, in 2002, CP, Ahmedabad, later
transferred on deputation to the CBI, New Delhi, currently DGP, Gujarat.
Acc. No. 30: K. Srinivas, in 2002, Collector,
Acc. No. 31: Dr PK Mishra, in 2002, Principal
Secretary to the Chief Minister and Chief Executive Officer, Gujarat State
Disaster Management Authority, currently Addl. Secretary, Ministry of Home
Affairs, Gujarat Government.
Acc. No. 32: Kuldeep Sharma, in 2002, Range In-charge,
Ahmedabad Range, currently ADGP (Training).
Acc. No. 33: MK Tandon, in 2002, Addl. CP, Ahmedabad,
currently Range Inspector General (IG), Surat Range.
Acc. No. 34: K. Nityanandam, in 2002, Home Secretary,
currently, CP, Rajkot city.
Acc. No. 35: Rakesh Asthana, on deputation in
2002, from April 2002, Deputy Inspector General (DIG), CID-Crime,
currently IG, Vadodara Range. Head of the Special Investigation Team (SIT)
probing the Godhra train fire.
Acc. No. 36: AK Sharma, in 2002, SP, Mehsana,
currently IG, Ahmedabad Range.
Acc. No. 37: GC Murmu, Secretary, Home Department (Law
& Home), Government of Gujarat.
Acc. No. 38: Shivanand Jha, Secretary, Home,
Government of Gujarat.
Acc. No. 39: DH Brahmbhatt, Collector, Panchmahal
Acc. No. 40: Deepak Swaroop, in 2002, IG, Vadodara
Range, currently, CP, Vadodara.
Acc. No. 41: Sudhir Sinha, in 2004, CP Vadodara,
currently CP, Surat.
Acc. No. 42: K. Kumarswami, former Addl. CP, Vadodara,
currently IGP (Intelligence), Gujarat.
Acc. No. 43: BS Jabaliya, District Police Chief, Anand.
Acc. No. 44: DG Vanzara, former Deputy Commissioner of
Police (DCP), Ahmedabad Crime Branch, (May 2002 to July 2005), former DIG
(Border Range) and head of the Anti-Terrorism Squad. He was suspended and
is currently in jail for his involvement in the Sohrabuddin Sheikh
Acc. No. 45: Rahul Sharma, in 2002, SP, Bhavnagar, and
thereafter, DCP, Control Room, currently SP (CBI), Gandhinagar.
Acc. No. 46: Raju Bhargava, in 2002, SP, Panchmahal
district, currently SP, Sabarkantha.
Acc. No. 47: (Ms) Anju Sharma, in 2002, Collector,
Acc. No. 48: DD Tuteja, in 2002, CP, Vadodara city,
Acc. No. 49: Bhagyesh Jha, former Collector, Vadodara,
currently Director of Information, I & B Department, Government of
Acc. No. 50: Nitiraj Solanki, in 2002, SP, Sabarkantha
Acc. No. 51: Amrutlal Patel, in 2002, Collector,
Mehsana district, currently Collector of Administration, Indian Space
Research Organisation (ISRO), Ahmedabad.
Acc. No. 52: Upendra Singh, in 2002, CP, Rakjot.
Acc. No. 53: PN Patel, in 2002, Collector,
Acc. No. 54: VM Pargi, in 2002, DCP, Ellis Bridge
Police Station, Ahmedabad, currently Addl. CP, Surat.
Acc. No. 55: KG Erda, in 2002, Police Inspector (PI),
Meghaninagar Police Station, Ahmedabad, former PI-CID Intelligence,
Viramgam, currently PI (Local Crime Branch), Valsad.
Acc. No. 56: KK Mysorewala, in 2002, PI, Naroda Police
Station, Ahmedabad, currently, Reader to DIGP, Gandhinagar Range.
Acc. No. 57: MT Rana, Asst. Police Commissioner,
G-Division, Ahmedabad city.
Acc. No. 58: Tarun Barot, PI, Ahmedabad Crime Branch.
Acc. No. 59: Narendra Amin, currently Asst. CP,
Ahmedabad Crime Branch.
Acc. No. 60: GC Raiger, in 2002, ADGP (Intelligence).
Acc. No. 61: KR Kaushik, in 2002, ADGP (Crime) and
later CP, Ahmedabad.
Acc. No. 62: Amitabh Pathak, in 2002, IG, Gandhinagar
Acc. No. 63: Satish Verma, in 2002, DIG (Border
Range), Kutch, currently with the SRP Training Centre, Junagadh.