It has been reported that on Saturday (12th October) CBI has once again interrogated Amit Shah at Delhi in connection with the Javed-Ishrat case. Can we ask the CBI how long will they continue this chit-chat session? In our article titled “Denying The Evidentiary Value of Vanzaraâ€™s Statement: Who is CBI Director Ranjit Sinha Trying To Protect?“, we had expressed our deep anxiety in the manner CBI was investigating the Ishrat-Javed fake encounter case. This is how we had expressed our exasperation:
The investigations of all the encounter cases of Gujarat starting with the Sohrabuddin case suffers from a typical syndrome, now known as the “Geeta Johri syndrome”. When any investigation reaches the stage of disclosing evidence to implicate the political bosses, the supervisory officer of the investigating officer (I.O.) starts developing either cold feet or simply derails the investigation to save the political bosses
There was direct evidence of the fact that Amit Shah had scuttled the visit of the then I.O. Shri VL Solanki to Udaipur jail, the permission for which he had sought for on 18th May 2006, to examine Tulsi Prajapati who had disclosed the location of Sohrabuddin to the accused Gujarat policemen facilitating his abduction and murder of Sohrabuddin and Kausarbi. Geeta Johri had blocked the permission and gave it only after the death of Tulsi! On instruction from Minister of State for Home Amit Shah, Johri also asked Solanki to change his report.
The CBI did file the charge-sheet against Amit Shah and 19 others in the Tulsi Prajapati fake encounter case but did not arrest a single accused. We have never heard of accused being charged under 302 IPC (Murder!) yet not arrested! Strangely, the CBI itself had produced dozens of phone calls between Amit Shah and the accused police officers like D G Vanzara and Rajkumar Pandian yet developed a cold feet at the stage of arresting him.
In the Javed-Ishrat case, the CBI appears to have suffered from a similar ailment. In the charge-sheet that has been already filed by CBI in the Javed-Ishrat case on 3rd July, 2013, the evidence against Amit Shah is substantial in nature .The then ACP KM Vaghela, a senior officer of the encounter team has made the following statement under section 161 of CrPC which is a relevant and admissible evidence:
Thereafter, I had gone inside the chamber of Shri Vanzara and told him to agree to what Shri Singhal wanted but Shri Vanzara refused, saying that everything was decided yesterday with Shri PP Pandey and Shri Rajinder Kumar, the Joint Director SIB Ahmedabad, and that he had already got the green signal from the kali dadhi and safed dadhi about everything, referring to the code names we had for the MoS (Home) Shri Amit Shah and the Chief Minister Shri Narendra Modi respectively
In another statement before the Magistrate under section 164 of the CrPC , Shri DH Goswami, the then DySP has stated as under:
I found that Shri Rajinder Kumar, Shri PP Pandey and Shri DG Vanzara were present there. These three seniors were discussing the details of the FIR of some encounter that they were planning and I remember Shri Rajinder Kumar telling Shri Vanzara to speak to the Chief Minister about it and Shri Vanzara saying he would talk to the â€˜safed dadhiâ€™ and the â€˜kali dadhiâ€™, the well known monikers in the Crime Branch for the Chief Minister Narendra Modi and the Minister of State (Home) Shri Amit Shah..
Shri Singhal had disagreed on reading this draft complain and I vaguely remember it had something to do with the motive in the draft and about the girl Ishrat. But Shri Vanzara was adamant and even said that he had approval of the Chief Minister and the MoS (Home).
Most importantly all the calls made between Amit Shah and Vanzara match the timing and sequence of events as described by multiple police personnel of the Gujarat State in their CrPC 164 and 161 statements that describes the unfolding of the conspiracy.
|Serial No.||Caller 1||Caller 2||Date-Time||Remarks|
|1||Vanzara||Amit Shah (R)||1/6/04 23:22||The day Rajinder Kumar generated the fake intelligence input|
|2||Vanzara||Amit Shah (R)||8/6/04 23:54||About 36 hours before Amin/Barot start camping to intercept Javed-Ishrat|
|3||Vanzara||Amit Shah||14/6/04 22:57||Night before the encounter|
|4||Vanzara||Amit Shah||15/6/04 6:10||40 minutes after the encounter! Amit Shah himself calls Vanzara|
|5||Vanzara||Amit Shah||15/6/04 7:09||1:40 hours after the encounter|
In the backdrop of the abundant evidence that the encounter was a staged one:
- What were Amit Shah and Vanzara speaking about just few hours before the ghastly encounter? (Refer to Call 3 in the table)
- What explains Amit Shah calling Vanzara 40 minutes after the encounter at 6:10 a.m on 15th June? None of the policemen who were reportedly present at the scene of crime have said that any one of them had spoken to Amit Shah immediately after the encounter. If it was a â€˜genuineâ€™ encounter as claimed by the Gujarat Police, how come Amit Shah knew about it at the ungodly hour of 6:10 a.m. and instead of calling the Commissioner of Police, he has to call up the prime accused Vanzara?
- What explains all the midnight calls in the table above between a Home Minister and a police officer of the rank of DIG during that period? (Refer Call 1 and Call 2)
Furthermore, Shri DG Vanzara in his resignation letter has made allegations which clearly disclosed a cognizable offence against Amit Shah in the various “encounters” carried out by Vanzara and is team. We quote herein below the relevant extract from Vanzaraâ€™s letter:
I, therefore, would like to categorically state in the most unequivocal words that the officers and men of Crime Branch, ATS and Border Range, during the period of years between 2002 to 2007, simply acted and performed their duties in compliance of the conscious policy of this government…
Gujarat CID/Union CBI had arrested me and my officers in different encounter cases holding us to be responsible for carrying out alleged fake encounters, if that is true, then the CBI investigating officers of all the four encounter cases of Shohrabuddin, Tulasiram, Sadique Jamal and Isharat Jahan have to arrest the policy formulators also as we, being field officers, have simply implemented the conscious policy of this government which was inspiring, guiding and monitoring our actions from the very close quarters. By this reasoning, I am of the firm opinion that the place of this government, instead of being in Gandhinagar, should either be in Taloja Central Prison at Navi Mumbai or in Sabarmati Central Prison at Ahmedabad.
What is most shocking today is the fact that while the ‘so called encounter team of Gujarat’ Police led by Vanzara and GL Singal who were the most ardent supporters of Modi and Amit Shah are willing to give evidence against their bosses, why is CBI refusing to act! The High Court had reposed faith in the CBI hoping that it will be able to bring all the culprits to justice but somewhere down the line, CBI appears to be bending before the political pressure from the opposition party.