Supreme Court of India dismisses Zakia’s plea challenging SIT’s clean chit to Modi, but the Supreme court upholds SIT’s conclusions. Some are trending #GujaratHasWon. But it’s not right, Gujarat will win in a true sense when Teesta-Zakia & media which promoted their lies are prosecuted for making false allegations & other offences.
SIT constituted by SC with anti-Modi judges like Aftab Alam, and Arijit Pasayat said that Teesta Setalvad tutored witnesses, cooked up macabre tales of wanton killings, and false witnesses were tutored to give evidence about imaginary incidents.
After this Teesta, Setalvad denied the ToI report & claimed that the mention of tutoring witnesses was of Gujarat Govt, not SIT. Her denial was responded to by a counter-article by TOI that the report was true of SIT & not Gujarat Govt.
Even after Dr Kanoria showing his post-mortem report of 2 March 2002 to court in 2010 that no pregnant woman’s womb was ripped open & fetus taken out. Teesta continued to lie which is a violation of 153-A & 499-500 of IPC.
SIT said that Zakia Jafri’s complaint vs Modi & others is basically Teesta Setalvad’s complaint, about which Zakia has no personal knowledge. Zakia was examined by SIT on 7 Nov 2008 but she could not state a single fact of her own complaint [SIT report, p 16].
Zakia said in a statement recorded u/s 161 CrPC on 6 March 2002 that while they were being shifted from the Gulberg Society in jail vans, the mob assembled there would have lynched all of them to death but for the timely action by the police.[SIT report, p 16]
SIT said [p 18] ‘Accused No. 24 in Zakia Jafri’s complaint Babubhai Rajput is not traceable at d given address & it has come to light that no such person was ever in existence at d relevant point of time.’ These ridiculous mistakes were covered up by the media!
Accused Nos. 45 Rahul Sharma & 63 Satish Verma were listed as witnesses as well as accused. Zakia & Teesta said they are witnesses & inadvertently listed as accused. The complainant’s own witnesses were named as accused! It shows the complaint’s childish nature.
Zakia’s complaint said that the Collector of #Godhra Jayanti Ravi advised against transporting #Godhra victim bodies to Ahmedabad. SIT said on p 64 that this was false as Jayanti Ravi herself stated that she supported bringing bodies to Ahmedabad.
Zakia’s complaint said that the Collector of Godhra Jayanti Ravi advised against transporting Godhra victim bodies to Ahmedabad. SIT said on p 64 that this was false as Jayanti Ravi herself stated that she supported bringing bodies to Ahmedabad.
Zakia Jafri’s complaint alleged that the then Minister Ashok Bhatt was positioned in Ahmedabad City Control Room by Narendra Modi. SIT said on p 76 that it is conclusively established that the late Ashok Bhatt did not visit Police Control Room on 28 Feb 02.
Zakia’s complaint alleged there was an undue delay in calling the Army. SIT examined & dismissed this allegation on pp 135-138. The Hindu reported the next day that Modi ‘frantically’ called the Army, which means opposite to ‘delaying’.
Zakia’s complaint said ‘No departmental action was taken against Jadeja, the then SP, Dahod District despite recommendation by CBI’. But it turned out that the CBI had not recommended any departmental action against Jadeja at all! SIT said this on pp 176-77!
Zakia complaint alleged that riot survivors made 100+ calls to Ahmedabad Commissioner P C Pandey on 28 Feb 02 but his mobile was permanently switched off. On p 204 SIT says that 302 calls were received/made on his phone on 28 Feb 02, his mobile was always on.
Zakia complaint alleged that 36 out of 40 killed in police firing in Ahmedabad on 28 Feb 2002 were Muslims. SIT said on p 210 that in reality on that day 17 were killed in police firing, of whom 11 were Hindus. Inflammatory/defamatory lies by Zakia-Teesta!
Zakia’s complaint alleged a secret meeting was held on 27 Feb 2002 evening in Lunawada village of Sabarkantha district. Firstly, the fact is that Lunawada is not a village, but a Taluka headquarters and is situated in Panchmahal, not in Sabarkantha district.
Secondly Zakia alleged then Ministers Ashok Bhatt & Prabhatsinh Chauhan were aware of this meeting, but SIT (p 226) examined their call records & said they weren’t in Lunawada. Neither Bhatt nor Chauhan received any call from Yogesh Pandya or Anil Patel as alleged by Zakia.
Zakia’s complaint wrongly alleged that G Subbarao, the then Chief Secretary was present in the meeting of 27 Feb evening. SIT report quotes Subbarao as saying (p 312) that he was abroad on that day & could not have participated in that 27 Feb night meeting!
Zakia’s complaint also listed D H Brahmbhatt, ex-Collector, Panchmahal district as an accused. SIT report on p 351 quotes him as saying that he was posted as Collector on 11 Dec 2003, i.e. long after the riots. Such false charges were made by Zakia-Teesta!
Zakia Jafri’s complaint alleges that Rakesh Asthana was Chief of Vadodara Range in 2002 & names him as accused. SIT says on p 328 that this was false as he was posted as Spl. IGP, Vadodara Range only after the riots i.e. with effect from 28 April 2003.
Zakia Jafri named Deepak Swaroop, ex- Spl. IGP, Vadodara Range as accused, & had also alleged that Swaroop did not depose before the Nanavati Commission. In fact he had deposed on 22 Oct 2005 & 29 Oct 2005 and produced a copy of his deposition to the SIT.
B S Jebalia was named by Zakia in the complaint as being involved in the Ode massacre as Anand District Police chief. SIT report [p 356] says he was posted there as SP from 23 Feb 2004 to 14 Dec 2006, much after 2002. [B D Vagehla was Anand Police Chief then].
To know more details of SIT findings, more mistakes in Zakia Jafri’s childish complaint, read Chapter 12 of our book ‘Findings of SIT’.
There is a lot of evidence against Teesta Setalvad for various offences, and this evidence has been conveniently suppressed by the Leftist media & any prosecution of her called ‘vindictive’.
The late Mukul Sinha & others of his ‘TruthofGujarat’ team (including Pratik Sinha, currently of Alt News) spread many inflammatory & defamatory lies too. To know their lies and the facts.
Many innocents who had nothing to do with riots were falsely named as accused by Zakia-Teesta, as we saw. They should now sue Zakia-Teesta. Pravin Togadia was one person who did file a defamation suit. (He was in Ayodhya from Feb-May 2002). Then one can say #GujaratHasWon.
(DISCLAIMER: This article has not been edited by Organiser staff and is a compilation of tweets shared by the Twitter account Gujaratriots.com @Gujarattiotscom. The Organiser neither condones nor endorses any of the views shared in this article here)