Political criminals behind Pandya murder
Police and allied departments exist to control the criminals. But what if the government uses them for its work? Investigating agencies have identified the role of cops in communal incidents across the country. The most critical role the cops played in Gujarat massacre is more than evident now.
What would the dignity of the uniform come to, if the department of police gets used by politicians in this manner? This question has come up at a time when the investigation of the murder of Haren Pandya that happened in 2003, is in progress.
Haren Pandya was seen as a rebel leader of Gujarat BJP when Modi was the CM. Pandya had criticized Modi over Gujarat massacre. He said government had a direct role to play in this. Subsequent to this, Pandya was killed mysteriously on March 26, 2003. His bullet ridden body was discovered around Law Garden in Ahmedabad.
All the accused in Haren case arrested by CBI were released later. Gujarat court had reprimanded central investigating agency for not providing clear details on the number of bullets that were pumped into Pandya’s body, the place where he was killed and the number of assailants. Now the answer to why a political leader like Pandya’s case was ignored by the police department is getting very clear. How do the murderers book their own kin?
Prosecution witness Azam Khan who was the witness in Sohrabuddin and his wife Kausar Bi’s murder case, has submitted before the CBI court on Saturday that former Gujarat IPS officer D G Vanzara had instructed Sohrabuddin to kill Pandya, and that the latter had shared this information with Azam Khan. Vanzara had informed CBI of a conspiracy to kill Pandya.
But just a few days before his murder, Pandya’s security cover was withdrawn. This step by government later proved to be very dangerous for his life. There are obvious suspicions about political power working behind his murder. And from this, it is even easy to decipher who was behind Sohrabuddin’s murder as well. Police and political leaders needed to finish off people who knew the secret behind Haren Pandya’s murder. It can be understood that the Gujarat government met this agenda by putting the police force to use.
CBI had failed in investigating the Sohrabuddin case as well. The agency failed to appeal after Amit Shah and the others were discharged from the case. Now this statement by the witness is forcing the agencies to consider opening cases of Pandya and Sohrabuddin once again.
Pandya family has always raised concerns about the investigation not being conducted well into his murder case by the agencies. Family members say the murderers are still roaming free. Yet, the CBI is not willing to admit it took the investigation in wrong direction. The Gujarat massacre, followed by Pandya murder and the killing of Sohrabuddin and his men were carried out by a similar set of people.
If we can conclude that this force was part of the Gujarat government, it is also part of today’s central government as well. Hence, it is difficult for Pandya’s killers to be caught. Haren Pandya had given an interview to Outlook magazine about the public rally PM Modi had organized on February 27, 2002. He had mentioned Modi had instructed that the arsonists and miscreants should be dealt with and softly and that Hindus should be allowed to placate their anger.
Outlook had reported this fact later that a former minister had said his identity should not be revealed under any circumstances either as a BJP man or as a former minister in writing or even in casual sense. I will die even if you mention me as a BJP man or as a minister. In seven months post this interview, Pandya was killed. Vanzara in his resignation paper had said if he ‘drowned’; he’d ensure more people would go down with him thus indicating to the government that he had secured his game, issuing a note of caution to Modi and Shah. Now, the government cover around Pandya case can be undone soon, if the case is reinvestigated along with that of Sohrabuddin murder. Unless this happens, the truth will remain buried deep and to the convenience of many people behind it.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Speaker rules out discussion on Guv''s conduct amid K''taka Assembly standoff
Bengaluru (PTI): In an effort to end the logjam over the Governor's address that has stalled proceedings for the past week, Karnataka Assembly Speaker U T Khader on Wednesday ruled that legislators should not discuss Thaawarchand Gehlot or his conduct in the house, saying such debates send the wrong message to the public.
The House has witnessed repeated disruptions and adjournments since the session began on January 22 over the issue of the governor's conduct.
During his address to the joint sitting of the Karnataka legislature on January 22, Gehlot read out only three sentences from the 122-paragraph speech prepared by the state government.
The speech included criticism of the Centre for replacing the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) with the Viksit Bharat–Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajivika Mission (Gramin) (VB-G RAM G), portions of which the governor declined to read.
Concluding his address in about two minutes, the governor left the house, triggering a commotion as Congress legislators attempted to gherao him and raised slogans.
While the opposition BJP accused the ruling Congress and its ministers of "insulting" the governor and demanded action, the treasury benches countered by claiming the governor had "insulted the National Anthem by leaving before it was played."
The house again witnessed heated arguments on the issue earlier in the day, leading to adjournment.
During the interruption, Khader held a meeting with ministers and opposition members to resolve the impasse.
When proceedings resumed, the speaker delivered his ruling.
Referring to the events of January 22 and the subsequent debate, Khader said the conduct and discussions had conveyed the wrong message to the public.
"Our conduct as members of this House and the opinions expressed must be in good taste and in accordance with constitutional provisions. They must uphold the dignity of the House and its members. We must introspect in this direction," he said.
He stressed the need for caution to ensure that such incidents are not repeated in the future.
"Let us end this matter here, continue the discussion on the motion of thanks to the governor, and refrain from discussing the governor or his conduct in this house," the speaker said.
Leader of the Opposition R Ashoka said the house should express regret over what he termed an "insult" to the governor.
Responding, Chief Minister Siddaramaiah said the situation would not have arisen had the governor read out the entire address.
"Asking the house to express regret is not appropriate. Why did the governor leave even before the National Anthem was played," Siddaramaiah asked.
BJP MLA S Suresh Kumar reminded Siddaramaiah that as Leader of the Opposition in 2011, he had asked then Governor Hansraj Bhardwaj to curtail his address.
Bhardwaj had subsequently placed the address on the table of the house, requesting members to treat it as read.
Siddaramaiah said the situation in January 2011 was different from the present one.
The debate grew intense, leading to another adjournment of the house.
