Why Be So Selective About Using CBI
By Mustafa Khan
24 August, 2010
Countercurrents.org
When the parliament meets tomorrow it must use its time and forum to discuss not just the nuclear liability bill and the enormity of the situation in the Kashmir valley in view of Prakash Karat’s view that the protest is spontaneous and solution within the constitution should not stand in the way of negotiation but also government’s pro quid quo deal with the BJP over the bill and also how far the government would go to let CBI arrest Gordhan Zadaphia in the end of September when enough proof exits with the agency and the private domain ? The private domain is replete with information on what Narendra Modi said about the 2002 pogroms which the Supreme Court still calls “riots”. Why did CBI selectively deal with Malegaon vis-à-vis Gujarat?
CBI‘s most glaring fault is not that the officers are any less diligent than people like Hemant Karkare. It is how we put to use the top intelligence agency to work and what we do not do in the words of Vice President Hamid Ansari : have an oversight committee to monitor intelligence gathering. The oversight committee of parliamentarians comprising of the ruling and other party members would have surely told that:
1) In the case of Malegaon blasts of 2006 the CBI told the Supreme Court that it did not find any significant new facts and thereby it accepted and submitted what the Malegaon police and ATS under KP Raghuvanshi had included in their chargesheets. It did not investigate the matter as Karkare had done for the 2008 blast. New facts have emerged that the 2006 was also the handiwork of those behind the 2008 blast. Why did the CBI sleep for such a long time and not notice the relevance?
2) A convincing proof: the ATS under Raghuvanshi had made accused Abrar Ahmed as an approver. The CBI did not bother to look into the matter. It attached the consumer application form of his mobile phone and presented as proof. The form has not been signed by Abrar at three stipulated spaces for the applicant. How could this happen? The agency was already groaning and complaining that it was overburdened and clearly showed its unwillingness to take up the matter! Was the lack of will power on the part of the government or the agency? A committed government would have taken the agency to task over the matter. It is the government that failed the agency.
3) On September 1st 2006 itself the Nasik control room received actionable intelligence that terrorist attack would take place within a short period. The ASP of Malegaon Mr. Kumbhare had informed the SP (Rural) Mr. Rajwardhan that there was imminent threat. The ASP had gone to the trustees of Hamidiya mosque at the grave yard a day before the bomb blasts and apprised them of the danger. He mentioned that police would be deployed within and outside the graveyard and beggars would not be allowed within the vicinity of the mosque and the graveyard. Even then there were no police men in sight when the blasts occurred and many beggars were injured and killed within the premises of the mosque. Why were there no police men at the mosque? The CBI did not bother to into this matter despite the fact that many representations by Individuals and groups were made to it during its officers visited the town, Malegaon. Why did the Congress government at the centre and in the state of Maharashtra not take note of these, at least the Home department?
4) Coming in the year of the Nanded blast, the Malegaon Hamidiya mosque blasts of 2006 fall into a pattern. The bomb blasts at Purna mosque, Parbhani mosque, Jalna mosque, Mecca mosque Hyderabad, Jama Masjid Delhi and Malegaon have all occurred between 1.35 PM and 1.45 PM on Friday midday prayer when the crowd of Muslims is fullest. Even the Nanded bomb was scheduled to explode at the railway station mosque in Aurangabad on April 4 2006 at 1.35 PM but because of the mistake in setting instead of 1.35 PM it exploded at 1.35 AM in the house of the Bajrang Dal activist Naresh before he and his accomplice could travel to Aurangabad. In most cases Hindutva extremists were involved. But without rhyme and reason the police booked Muslims in Malegaon blasts!
This is very bizarre because none of the accused in Malegaon 2006 blasts resemble the police sketches of the suspects even remotely. Most of the accused are bearded wearing tunic and pyjama and have round skull caps while the sketches are of country youths of rather Hindu origin as they are clean shaved. The police in fact believed one to be a Bajrang Dal activist, Dashrath Pawar. One of the most poignantly left out aspects is the abandoning of police search for the prototypes of the sketches. One of them had tried to keep a black bag with a tea vendor who recognized him when the sketches were telecast. He volunteered to go to the police and help them. Nothing came out of this. The CBI did not even feel necessary to look into all these? In contrast to this Hemant Karkare had spoken out that he had not found any SIMI involvement in the 2006 (ab tak SIMI ke role ka pata nahin chal saka). This is what Karkare told to Urdu Times on August 16, 2008. Full two years after this the CBI draws a blank over this when it submitted its periodic report to the SC. Why is the agency treating Malegaon 2006 case carelessly? Has not the government put any pressure on it?
5) In the case of Amit Shah the agency collected mountains of documents and was zeroing in on Narendra Modi but then came the nuclear liability bill. For the sake of getting it through the parliament the government made a quid pro quo deal with BJP. We are in for another Rip Van Winkle sleep!
