A Gujarat-cadre police officer who is a member of the Special Investigation Team (SIT) appointed to probe the encounter killing of Mumbai college-girl Ishrat Jahan has said in an affidavit filed before a division bench of the Gujarat high court that all early evidence in the case points to the 19-year-old girl and her three friends being shot dead in a fake encounter.
The Ishrat encounter, like other encounters in Gujarat, had a similar pattern. Ishrat was believed to have come on a suicide mission to kill Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi. The Gujarat police intercepted her plans and killed her. This encounter was carried out by D.G. Vanzara, a Gujarat police encounter specialist who has over a dozen encounters to his credit. All these encounters involved “terrorists” aiming to kill Mr Modi. Mr Vanzara is currently in Sabarmati jail for his role in the Sohrabuddin fake encounter killing. But, a year-and-a-half before D.G. Vanzara killed Sohrabuddin, he had slain Ishrat and her three friends.
After justice eluded the families of Ishrat and her friends in Gujarat, they ran from pillar to post. A special investigation team comprising three police officers — one suggested by the Union government, one by the father of Pranesh Pillai (Ishrat’s friend and encounter victim), and one by the Gujarat government — was formed to find out the truth.
The truth still seems far away. But, in a significant development that shocked the Gujarat government, Mr Satish Verma, a member of the high-powered SIT, filed an affidavit indicating that Ishrat was killed in a cold-blooded, staged encounter. Mr Verma has pointed out how the probe was being deliberately derailed and delayed and alleged this was being done by the SIT chairman, Mr Karnail Singh, a Delhi-based IPS officer. Mr Verma’s affidavit says the June 2004 killing of Ishrat Jahan in an encounter was staged and a fresh FIR should be filed against all police officers involved. As many as 22 Gujarat policemen, including some senior officers, are believed involved in this encounter. Mr Verma says a fresh police complaint should be registered against these 22 Gujarat policemen.
During the hearing on Friday, Mr Verma told a Gujarat high court division bench comprising Justices Jayant Patel and Abhilasha Kumari: “There are two possibilities in the case; one is that four people (who got) killed in the encounter had come to kill the Gujarat chief minister, and the other is that they were killed in cold blood by the police. There is a possibility of the second one (having taken place) irrespective of the first one.”
In the affidavit filed before the division bench, the IPS officer said, “The illustrative evidence brings out the well-founded allegation of a fake encounter. This is different from the version contained in the FIR.”
“The reply of the panel of doctors who conducted the post-mortem ... shows that the paths of many bullets inside the bodies of the deceased persons are not consistent with the FIR version of the incident,” he said.
The Gujarat government is already facing flak for the 2005 Sohrabuddin encounter in connection with which over a dozen policemen, including three IPS officers, are in jail and Gujarat minister of state for home Amit Shah is at present on conditional bail that does not permit him to enter the state.
The Gujarat police had said that Ishrat Jahan, along with boyfriend Ishrat Javed Shaikh (also known as Pranesh Pillai), Zeeshan Johar and Amjad Ali Rana, were killed in an encounter with the Gujarat police on the outskirts of Ahmedabad on June 15, 2004, while they were on a mission to assassinate Mr Modi. Mr Verma says in his affidavit that there is enough evidence to prove that these four were confined in a farmhouse by the Gujarat police for at least four to five days before being shot dead. Worse, preliminary investigations suggest that they were kept in the same farmhouse where Kauserbi, the wife of Sohrabuddin, was confined before being slain a year later.
Ishrat’s family had said they believed she was abducted by the Gujarat police near Mumbai. Mr Verma’s affidavit appears to corroborate the family’s suspicions. Mr Verma, in his detailed affidavit, has quoted the farmhouse owner, the farmhouse watchman and a police head constable, Moti Tadcha Desai. However, Mr Verma’s affidavit says that soon after he took Moti Desai’s statement, there was a lot of “movement” and soon Moti Desai retracted his statement. It must be noted, however, that after the Ishrat encounter, some terror-linked websites had put up her name as a member. These claims were soon withdrawn. Claims were also made that David Coleman Headley had confirmed that Ishrat was a terrorist in his confession.
Mr Verma has indicated that his boss in this case — SIT chairman Karnail Singh (suggested by the Union home ministry) — was not facilitating an unbiased investigation. He has also pointed fingers at the other SIT member, Mohan Jha, a name suggested by the Gujarat government.
Earlier, when metropolitan magistrate S.P. Tamang had given a report stating that the Ishrat encounter was cold-blooded murder carried out by the Gujarat police for “selfish motives”, the Gujarat government had obtained a stay. Thereafter, an SIT was set up by the Gujarat high court.
Mr Verma has given a detailed account of the sequence of events after the SIT began its probe, of how differences cropped up between the three members, and the approaches the members took in pursuing the investigation. He said his observations were based on the evidence collected and the statements of witnesses who were being in the process of being influenced.
During the course of investigation, Mr Verma recorded the statements of Raju Jeerawala, owner of Arham farmhouse, watchman Raman and police constable Moti Desai and these led him to believe that the victims had already been in custody prior to being killed in the encounter with the police. “The statement of Moti T. Desai, head constable, read together with the statements of Raju Jeerawala and watchman Raman, show that one of the two alleged Pakistan nationals killed in this case was kept in captivity at Arham farm for about five days prior to the date of the incident,” Mr Verma states in the affidavit.
The Gujarat high court, meanwhile, appointed advocate Yogesh Lakhani as amicus curiae (friend of the court) in the case.