Modi’s name has been cleared by experienced cops as well as by the various levels of judiciary

The Supreme Court’s verdict dismissing the appeal filed by Zakia Jafri and Teesta Setalvad challenging the Special Investigative Team’s (SIT’s) clean chit to Narendra Modi in the 2002 Gujarat riots should settle the issue for once and all. But, alas, that is not likely to happen, what with the aandolanjeevis’ obstinacy with maligning the Prime Minister who was Gujarat chief minister in 2002.

The Bench headed by Justices A.M. Khanwilkar was clear in its ruling: “The SIT has not found any conspiracy, linking separate and disparate acts of arson and looting or outrageous claims made in sting operations or individual utterances/publications of purported hate speech, to any singular larger conspiracy or planned event.”

The Bench went on to say: “The materials gathered during the investigation in no way link any ‘meeting of the minds’ in any of the nine cases investigated by the SIT or for that matter, other incidents alleged in the complaint or the protest petition. The riots across the state had taken place spontaneously, immediately after the Godhra train carnage.”

Further, it said that no material was discovered “pointing towards any meeting of minds/conspiracy in the higher echelons of the administration or [that] the political establishment conspired with other persons to cause such riots or [it] turned a Nelson’s eye when the riots had triggered and continued.”

Not only was there no conspiracy involving the top ruling politicians but there were also “disgruntled officials” in Gujarat at that time who wanted “to create sensation by making revelations which were false.” The apex court said the SIT investigation has “fully exposed” the “falsity of claims” of such officials.

Representing the anti-Modi litigants, senior advocate and former Union minister Kapil Sibal argued that the Supreme Court-appointed SIT did not conduct investigation on the crucial aspects of the matter, which was essential to establish a larger conspiracy.

Countering Sibal, senior advocate and former attorney-general Mukul Rohatgi said that the SIT not only did its job but often exceeded the remit set out by the Supreme Court. All in its pursuit of justice. He stressed that Zakia’s charges mainly pointed towards the dereliction of duty and did not hint at any criminality.

Rohatgi also said that he suspected that the petition was being driven not by Zakia, the aggrieved party, but by Petitioner No. 2, i.e. social activist Teesta Setalvad who has ulterior motives in pursuing the same.

In this context, it would be instructive to scrutinize the chronology for the SC order. In 2006, Jafri urged the Gujarat Police to file an FIR against some officials and politicians, including Modi, who was then chief minister. She alleged that the state government had not done enough to prevent the riots and save people, including her husband.

In 2008, the apex court appointed an SIT to submit a report on the riots trials and also probe Jafri’s complaint.

In 2012, the SIT gave a clean chit to Modi and others, citing “no prosecutable evidence” and submitted its closure report to the Magistrate.

In 2013, Jafri filed a petition opposing the closure report. The Magistrate upheld the SIT’s closure report and dismissed her plea.

In response, Jafri moved the Gujarat High Court which upheld, in 2017, the Magistrate’s decision.

In 2018, Jafri and activist Teesta Setalvad approached the Supreme Court, saying the SIT did not examine all the material available, its investigation was biased, and investigators themselves should face a probe.

The allegations against Modi were based on former Gujarat police officer Sanjiv Bhat’s submissions. He had claimed to be present at a crucial government meeting. The SIT later found and concluded that Bhatt was not present at the meeting and hence, there was no other way to confirm the charges.

Three points need to be made here. First, Narendra Modi’s name has been cleared by experienced cops (comprising the SIT) as well as by the various levels of judiciary. One has to be a conspiracy theory buff to believe that so many cops and judicial officers, including three Supreme Court judges, could be manipulated.

Second, the Gujarat Police was under Modi, as he was chief minister till 2014, but not the SIT or the judiciary. Till that time, the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance was in power at the Centre; and it was in this period that Modi was exonerated of all charges not just by the SIT but also the local magistrate.

It is an open secret that the Congress has never been fond of Narendra Modi; in fact, the grand old party hates him the most. It has done everything possible to demean and demonize him. We should not lose sight of the fact that the UPA was in office for 10 long years (2004-14)—very long from the perspective of Modi, for he was the constant target of calumny, character assassination, and innuendo. The assaults were relentless—direct (from Congress leaders) and indirect (from pro-Congress activists like Setalvad), legal and political.

In that period, the Congress held every lever of power; as the ruling party, it also had access to the resources of the Indian State. And yet, it could not find anything against Narendra Modi.

Instead of acknowledging the truth or at least giving some credence to the possibility of his innocence and going slow against him (‘Maybe the person is innocent, maybe we got is all wrong’), the Congress and its privateer-freebooters like Setalvad consistently and persistently worked to malign Narendra Modi.

As the SC Bench pointed out, “allegations regarding larger conspiracy at the highest level… is founded on the alleged utterances made by the then Chief Minister in an official meeting (on February 27, 2002, in Gandhinagar) while addressing the DGP, the then Chief Secretary and other senior officials of the state to allow to vent to the Hindu anger on the minority in the wake of Godhra incident.”

The petitioner relied on the statements of police officers Sanjiv Bhatt, who claimed to have attended the meeting, and R.B. Sreekumar, and former Minister Haren Pandya, but the SIT concluded “that the claim of concerned persons is false and figment of imagination,” the SC said.

“The SIT after thorough investigation has recorded its opinion that neither Mr Sanjiv Bhatt nor Mr Haren Pandya was present in the stated meeting. Similarly, even Mr R.B. Sreekumar had no personal knowledge as he did not attend the said meeting. Besides, Mr R.B. Sreekumar was a disgruntled officer,” said the top court.

In a way, the apex court’s ruling validates the SIT’s findings, which had given a clean chit to Narendra Modi way back in 2013, when the UPA was in office. On April 25, 2013, SIT lawyer R.S. Jamuar said, “Modi has never said that go and kill people.”

Also, he said, “Teesta Setalvad and others have falsified the complaint targeting the chief minister who had never said that ‘go and kill people’.”

Investigating something again and again doesn’t change the result if it has been done properly. But the aandolanjeevis like Setalvad can’t believe in any finding unless it is in accordance with their own prejudices and dogmas. She is not bothered how her stubbornness hurts others. She and others of her ilk may face the consequences for maligning others.

The trials and tribulations the aandolanjeevis subjected Narendra Modi didn’t shatter him, showing that he is made of sterner stuff. They hounded him for almost two decades, but he continues to strive to take India to greater heights.

(The author is an advocate in the Supreme Court of India)