State opposes bail for Setalvad, Sreekumar claiming they hatched ‘larger conspiracy’

Opposing the regular bail applications of activist Teesta Setalvad and ex-DGP R B Sreekumar, the state government on Wednesday claimed before a court that as part of a “larger conspiracy”, the two had presented to “society and different forums” that the riots in Godhra after the train carnage was “sponsored and engineered by the state government” and the mastermind was “none than the then chief minister”.

Stressing on the “larger conspiracy” against the state machinery including the then chief minister, Special Public Prosecutor Mitesh Amin said, “The desire to destabilize the government was so intense, that the accused portrayed that even Godhra train carnage was part of government’s conspiracy.”

Hence, Amin, who was appearing for the state government appointed-Special Investigation Team (SIT), said that Setalvad accused the entire machinery of state governance of conspiracy—from top echelons including the then chief minister Narendra Modi to most of the ministers, bureaucrats, and other important kegs of the said machinery.

Also Read: Claim that money was taken is absolutely false: Teesta

Amin was referring to the petition filed by Zakia Jafri, wife of ex-Congress MP Ahsan Jafri who was killed in Gulberg Society Massacre. Jafri had filed a complaint alleging Narendra Modi—now the prime minister—and over 60 others including then cabinet ministers, IAS and IPS officers for allegedly orchestrating the riots."

Amin told the court that “this claim of larger conspiracy behind the riots was dictated to Jafri was Setalvad.”

“Jafri was merely a tool used by Setalvad and other co-accused,” Amin argued before the sessions judge D D Thakkar.

According to the special prosecutor’s argument, the “aim” of the accused persons was “to politicise and sensationalise the crime and that too for ulterior design.” Claiming that “Setalvad is a politically aspirant lady,” Amin told the court: “Madam Jafri was in the hands of Teesta Setalvad.” Amin also submitted statements of three witnesses recorded before magistrates under Section 164 of Code of Criminal Procedure.

Without naming them, Amin mentioned that one of them was closely associated with Setalvad, while the second witness’s photo was used to collect funds. He also said in court that the second witness’s photo came into being “coincidentally"” who was paid a “petty amount”, even though large funds were collected using his photo.

Saying that it was Setalvad who dictated Jafri’s complaint, Amin said: "…50 English words which any advocate practicing for 5 to 10 years won't understand are there in the complaint. Same is the position with regard to protest petition. My effort here is to indicate how Madam Jafri was used by the accused.” The protest petition in question was the one Jafri filed against the Supreme Court appointed-SIT that gave a clean chit to all accused, including Modi.

Amin said that the present FIR against the activist and two ex-police officers was not just about filing false affidavits but “it is a matter that has wide ramifications”.

“The investigation relates to examining materials put forward by these two and Sanjiv Bhatt (ex-IPS) at relevant points of time pertaining to the larger conspiracy,” the special prosecutor said. The “larger conspiracy” one of the accused, Bhatt, planned that he was present in the meeting on February 27, 2002, hours after the train carnage incident, wherein Modi allegedly told the officers “to let Hindus vent their anger”.

Amin also mentioned how the "larger conspiracy" started right after the riots broke out with the accused holding meetings in Delhi and Ahmedabad with political leaders of another party. In the affidavit filed by the SIT, the investigating officer named Congress leader the late Ahmed Patel on whose “behest” the conspiracy was allegedly hatched. Amin told the court that he didn't want to politicise the matter and therefore he only argued the crux of it. The hearing will continue on Thursday.