The Supreme Court has nailed Sanjiv Bhatt, but probably he does deserve sympathy.
This blog is about two people. One politician and
the Prime Minister of India and the other a Gujarat cop - now dismissed. From a reader’s perspective there are always different ways of looking at a blogger. On the
other hand, bloggers too preserve their rights and prejudices too.
Narendra Modi has
been a politician, a chief protagonist of my three books on his state and him – 'Godhra – A Journey to Mayhem' (published 2004), ‘Modi to Moditva – An Uncensored
Truth’ (2012) and ‘CM to PM - Narendra Modi' (a joint work with a Delhi-based
publisher in 2013). But Modi was never a friend though I had always admired him
for certain traits as an administrator in Gujarat and as a 'grounded' leader who looked decisive on many matters chiefly working on developmental projects.
On the
other hand, Sanjiv Bhatt was a good friend and more a 'good source' in Gujarat
police when I was deputed by Press Trust of India (PTI) there to cover the year’s toughest assignment the
post-Godhra mayhem of 2002.
I always believed Sanjiv or our 'Sanjiv Sahab' never lied
to me. I will continue to cherish this belief.
But on October 13, 2015, none
other than the Supreme Court of India had choicest of words and phrases for
him.
“We are not impressed by aforesaid submissions. It
cannot be said that the petitioner (Sanjiv Bhatt) has come to this Court with
clean hands,” the court of Chief Justice of India H L Dattu and Justice
Arun Mishra ruled.
I continued to be in a mystified stage as the
reports of the court proceedings came in. Of course, I knew from 2009-10 that Sanjiv
Bhatt was perhaps erroneous in his handling of the entire episode wherein he
had filed an affidavit claiming Modi as Chief Minister of Gujarat told select few senior
police officials (on February 27, 2002) that the Hindu rioters should be
allowed to avenge the injustice of Godhra train inferno.
Other police officials, including the then DGP K Chakravarthy had denied that Sanjiv Bhatt had attended such a meeting. There was no police record to substantiate Sanjiv's claims too. The official version being – he was too junior to be summoned for such a high-level meeting.
 |
| Godhra's charred train and Modi: Feb 27, 2002 |
Despite regarding him a friend and ‘reliable source’
– to use a journalistic cliche – I was somehow not convinced about Sanjiv Bhatt’s
version. I was often ridiculed in the established-secular lobby of New Delhi and
Ahmedabad journalism for my ‘not trusting’ a friend and backing a Hinduva
leader, Namo.
I probably went by my instincts and thought Sanjiv
Bhatt must have fallen into some wrong hands. The official claim that Sanjiv Bhatt was too junior
to attend such a meeting somehow worked in me. One reason for the same being,
only ‘trusted’ senior cops would be convened for a high-level meeting with a
Chief Minister. I knew from my experience in Nagaland, mere seniority does not
make you win a Chief Minister’s trust. S C Jamir, the former Nagaland Chief
Minister and the present Odisha Governor, had tutored me a few tricks of
running an administration!
So my argument was: even if Sanjiv Bhatt was
authorized to go to such a meeting (in the absence of his senior), there was no
surety the Chief Minister would trust a junior fellow. To say that Sanjiv Bhatt
did not know this would be wrong again!
Nevertheless, the detailed ruling from the apex
court of the land and that too telling in as many words that Sanjiv Bhatt has used ‘media card’ and was
only a tool to Modi’s political detractors was a sad affair overall.
The court had ruled, “He (Sanjiv) had exchanged e-mails with rival political party leaders and
was being tutored by the lawyer of NGO
and its activist. Ghost questions and answers were also prepared as to what the
petitioner was required to speak before Justice Nanavati Commission. Petitioner
has used the media card, has even sent the
e-mails to influence the judicial proceedings of a 3-Judge Bench of this Court (Supreme Court) and
has tried to influence the amicus curiae.
The e-mails also indicate that he tried pressure groups and tried to invoke media pressure”.
I felt let down.
Did
Sanjiv use some of his media friends too and needless to add as basking in the
‘glory’ of being one-man against Modi – Sanjiv’s friend circles in media had changed
by then. His onetime ‘babu moshai from Mumbai’ (this blogger) was hardly in the
inner circle! And thus during December 2012 election campaign for the state
assembly, my interaction with Sanjiv Bhatt – when his wife Shweta was
contesting against Modi from Maninagar assembly segment - was minimum and more
of a courtesy meeting.
Sanjiv’s friends now were high flying journos, TV
anchors and Padmasri awardees!
On October 14, a day after the apex court ruling, I
confided in my wife and few close friends in Delhi and Mumbai and also with one
special friend on Facebook that overall it was a ‘sad’ affair. Sanjiv has been
slammed – this time not by BJP’s battery of spokespersons but by the Supreme
Court itself. And if Sanjiv sahab had any ‘media card’ – our profession has
been misused.
I have stated earlier of the apprehension I had
about him falling into ‘wrong hands’ – for essentially I thought and many
journalists who have served in Ahmedabad would believe that he was a sharp cop.
In my book ‘Modi to Moditva – An Uncensored Truth’, I
traced a few fond memories of his genuine friendship and helping me in
discharge of my duties as a journalist for a highly demanding wire agency Press
Trust of India (PTI).
 |
| A Derailed bus! |
But, I am afraid, one cannot sympathise with him
further. So, rather one is convinced to take the harsh but candid line of a
noisy TV anchor that ‘the credibility of Sanjiv Bhatt is over’. This is perhaps
a big casualty of the 2002 Godhra train inferno and the subsequent politics
perpetrated from either side.
On a broader larger scale, what angers me most is the gross
abuse of police force, IPS cadre and a brilliant police officer – despite his
temperamental and other issues – by Modi detractors. This judgement of the
Supreme Court, according to me, has made our friend Sanjiv Bhatt the
Man-of-the-year 2015 – of course with the sad elements attached to it.
Is Sanjiv Bhatt it a case of abuse of a ‘weakest’ link by
Congress party and the NGO brigade?
We know in contest of un-equals or unbalanced
confrontation, like the story of David and Goliath; the weakest has to outsmart
the strongest. My friend just could not. Who can outsmart the political class
as a group?
We might see a morrow, wherein Narendra Modi and Sonia Gandhi would
join hands – solve national problems and share power and the limelight
together; where will be my helpless friend then? He will not approve of what I am stating. My friend, Sanjiv sahab is
still active in social networking. He has the right to do so. But he needs to
pull himself back for a while. And I sincerely feel so, more in my personal capacity.
(ends)
Tail
Piece:
Sanjiv Bhatt would still sit in some corner and probably tell himself and his wife – “the cause I am fighting is bigger than me”, as he had told TV journalists in 2011 after he was released from prison for being arrested in a related case.
 |
| Snap: Amarjeet Kumar Singh |
Since, this has been written more from a personal point of view, nothing much can be said. However, the problem with the 'cause' of 'those responsible for riots should be brought to book' is fraught with too many risks in India. There is lot of political capital to be made and lost; it is always difficult to glean truth from make-belief. I heard Modi telling a gathering in one of the HT summits, with Digvijay Singh sitting beside him, that he had asked for additional forces from Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra and Rajasthan (all Congress states). None responded. But in the case of Sanjeev Bhatt and Teestas, one side, including media, had concluded very early that Modi was guilty. Their tone suggested that it was just a matter of time when courts would hold him guilty. Nothing of this sort happened. But even now, this side is not ready to give-up (or, shall we say, accept the truth). I heard Indira Jaisingh saying that this "was a wrong judgement". I wondered if she just stopped short of casting aspersions on the Chief Justice himself, or being partisan. Riots, in such situations, will never reach 'closure' -- with both the sides involved in battle of attrition. In fact, both the sides would love to "keep the pot warm" so that its contents can be used as and when time arrives.
ReplyDelete