AHMEDABAD: The first part of Justice Nanavati-Mehta
commission report on Godhra carnage of February 27,
2002, leaves a lot to be desired when compared to the
same Justice GT Nanavati's anti-Sikh riot report
submitted in February 2005 when he was already in the
middle of the Godhra probe.
Anti-Sikh riot report has a list of 19 "eminent
witnesses" including two former Prime Ministers
Narasimha Rao and IK Gujral, top police officials and
politicians.
But the Godhra riot commission shied away from
questioning similar influential persons in Gujarat and
pinning blame of the incident on the administration.
Justice Nanavati did not summon Chief Minister
Narendra Modi or any of his ministers for deposition
despite
their names figuring in the riots and applications
made for the same.
Anti-Sikh riots happened in 1984, and Justice Nanavati
was asked to probe it, six years later, after other
commissions and panels had submitted their findings,
while post Godhra riots were still on when Justice
Nanavati was appointed to this commission.
Several top bureaucrats and police officers who were
at the helm of affairs when riots happened were not
even called for questioning.
Delhi, then a union territory, was headed by Lt
Governor PS Gavai who also testified before Justice
Nanavati and described how he was given marching
orders on November 3, 1984, three days after
assassination of then Prime Minister Indira Gandhi
which led to anti-Sikh riots.
Major General JS Jamwal who was General officer
commanding of Delhi area too deposed before the
commission regarding the exact timing of calling of
the Army – a fact that remains under mystery in the
post-Godhra riots here. But no army personnel was
summoned for questioning before the Nanavati-Mehta
commission.
Bureaucrats like PK Mishra who were in the Chief
Minister's Office, police officers like KR Kaushik who
was heading CID (crime) when it was probing the Godhra
case in 2002, before SIT, then Director General of
Police AK Bhargava who applied POTA on the case, were
never even considered for cross examination in this
case.
