HIGH COURT QUESTIONS SO CALLED 'DEPORTATION' OF ALLEGED 'BANGLADESHIS'

S.H. Iyer

A division bench of the Gujarat High Court comprising Chief Justice Mr. S.J. Mukhopadhaya and Mr. Justice Anant S. Dave, after preliminary hearing of a Public Interest Litigation filed by Shri Rajesh P. Mankad of Jan Sangharsh Manch challenging illegal arrest, detention and deportation of the hutment dwellers near Chandola lake of Ahmedabad city by the Special Operation Group (SOG) of Crime Branch on the ground of their being `Bangladeshi' nationals, directed the Government to file detailed affidavit on or before 8-2-2010. Division bench also framed the following the questions (1) When and why did the police arrest and detain the persons in question (2) Whether the Sessions Court or any other competent authority has passed any order of remand against the persons in question? (3) Whether the persons deported have been declared as Foreign Nationals by the competent tribunal under the Foreigners Act?

The petitioner Jan Sangharsh Manch had stated in their petition that on 23-4-2009 the SOG had arrested and detained several persons including men, women and children who were residing in hutments near Chandola lake of Ahmedabad city on the ground that they were citizens of Bangladesh . Out of 75 persons arrested, 27 were `deported' to Bangladesh on 25-11-2009 and 20 were `deported' on 10-1-2010. It was contended by the petitioner that all the persons arrested, detained and deported to Bangladesh are the citizens of India and that the police have handed over Indian citizens to a foreign country without any authority and sanction of law and without following the procedure prescribed by the Foreigners Act and therefore, the action on the part of the police was violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. Further hearing of the case is fixed on 8-2-2010.

Living in Hell: Struggle for Survival

Those who labor to build cities are destined to be excluded from the cities they built. This has been the history of the slum dwellers all over the world. Consigned to the fringes of the city, they make their jhuggi-jhopdis and live in the filth and dirt of the “effluent zones” of the cities. The residents of the “affluent zones” hate the sight of these miserable “encroachers” but have to tolerate their existence as they are still useful for maintaining the city as casuals and domestic workers. But as the city expands, the bull-dozers push them out farther just as garbage is removed. The story of the mega-city Ahmedabad is no different and thousands of slum dwellers have lost their shanties in the last few years to the bull-dozers.

For over two decades, Jansangharsh Manch has mobilized such slum dwellers to help them in their struggle for survival and scores of rallies and meetings have been held during this time to demand a proper housing policy for the marginalized sections. The struggle to save the 242 residence of Salatnagar has perhaps assumed epic proportions since this cluster of slums despite being demolished once by the Corporation and burnt down in the 2002 riots, stills survives.

On 19th December, a large meeting was held in Piplaj, the “new Andaman” for the slum dwellers of Ahmedabad. Whenever a slum is demolished, as an “alternative” accommodation, the slum dwellers are given a small plot of land in Piplaj, which till recently was a desolate, remote area in the outskirts of Ahmedabad. Though two years have passed after the establishment of this new cluster that houses the residents of Mahakali, Banas and other slums which were demolished, there are still no civic amenities like water, streets and gutters. The meeting resolved to fight for the JNURM facilities and a better future.

Earlier, on 4th December, a similar meeting was held in the Motera area by the residents of Valijibhai-ni-kuan to voice the same demand for improving the civic amenities like gutter, streets, drinking water and lights.

Shrinking Democracy: A Seminar Organised by Jan Sangarsh Manch

S.H. Iyer



Contrary to the claims made by the protagonists of the new economic order under Globalisation, democratic space has indeed shrunk. In a day long seminar on `Shrinking Democracy’ that was held at Vasudev Tripathi Hall, Shahpur, Ahmedabad on 20-12-2009 a large number of social activists, trade union leaders, industrial workers, and slum dwellers met to discuss the issue. Welcoming the participants, Dr. Mukul Sinha, Chairman of the New Socialist Movement introduced the subject and said that in the present era of globalization the voice of the common man was being throttled and democratic space was shrinking in all the spheres, be it the judiciary, legislature or executive.

Speaking on the occasion, former Chief Minister Shri Suresh Mehta was very critical about the functioning of the Gujarat Government in conducting the legislative and other businesses. He lamented that whatever little space the MLAs had in the existing democracy was also vanishing. He indicated that the assembly met only once in six months for two days. One day was reserved for condolence and obituary. The second day was reserved for shoutings and walkouts! MLAs have no say in the governance now. MLAs, media, and voters are all managed.

Speaking on the manner in which the democratic procedures to unravel corruption was being sabotaged, Shri Mehta spoke about a scam in the SUJALAM-SUFALAM SCHEME. While scrutinizing the accounts of a particular department in the above scheme, the CAG had noticed certain discrepancies and sought an explanation from the government, The government first initiated an inquiry through an IAS Officer, which, prima-facie, found that there were irregularities. However, for carrying out further enquiries, the government appointed another Committee which also came to same conclusion. Till date neither the report of the CAG nor the enquiry report has been tabled in the assembly! He also pointed out that in vibrant Gujarat, within a short span of three years, the number of people below poverty line has from risen from 78,000 to two lacs.

Coming down heavily on the demolition of hutments in big cities and urban areas, Shri Mahesh Bhatt said that though the right to shelter has been recognized as a fundamental right, it has still remained a dream for urban poor. The very object of enacting the Urban Land Ceiling Act was for the equitable distribution of surplus land so as to provide residential accommodation to the urban poor. Now this piece of welfare legislation has been repealed to make way for shopping malls. Moreover, section 40-J of the Town Planning Act provides for mandatory reservation of 10% land for housing the urban poor. However, the real question still remains – What has happened to the 10% land reserved for housing the urban poor?

Shri Amrish Patel, the General Secretary of GFTU, spoke against the creation of Special Economic Zones and the denial of labor laws within SEZs. Dr. Mukul Sinha spoke about the exploitation of tribals by of the corporate houses in connivance with the government who grab their land and other resources like minerals below their land. He said that the entire issue of “fighting” the Maoists was related to suppression of the tribal resistance. A common view emerging from the day long seminar was that the judiciary had failed to uphold its historical task of being the watchdog of democratic values and it was left to the people to rise for protecting their democratic rights.

Meeting against Fake Encounters

A national meet was organised by the Jamia Teachers' Solidarity Group (JTSG) at the Jamia Milia University at Delhi on 1st October, 2009 against the fake encounters that were becoming a regular feature of delivering “justice” to the “terrorists” by the police administration of several States. The meeting was presided Justice Sachhar. The meeting was addressed by both human rights activists as well as leaders from political parties. The meeting was being held with the back drop of the completion of one year of the Batla House encounter where two boys and a policeman had died.

The meeting reiterated its demand for a judicial Inquiry into the Batla House encounter. Representatives of Jan Sangharsh Manch also addressed the meeting

JSM TO CHALLENGE THE NANAVATI ORDER

NANAVATI COMMISSION DIRECTS OFFICERS OF CHIEF MINISTER'S OFFICE TO FILE AFFIDAVIT STATING THEIR TELEPHONIC TALKS BUT DECLINES TO ISSUE SUMMONS TO CHIEF MINISTER

After about two years of Jan Sangharsh Manch making application requesting the Commission to issue summons to seven persons including the Chief Minister Shri Narendra Modi for the purpose if enquiring into the role and conduct of the Chief Minister and/or any other minister in his council of ministers, police officers and political and non-political organizations in the Godhra and Post-Godhra incidents which took place between 27-2-2002 and 31-5-2002, the Enquiry Commission headed by Mr. Justice G.T. Nanavati passed order on 18-9-2009 as under:

1. Shri Omprakash Singh, who was the then PA to the Chief Minister to submit an affidavit to the Commission stating therein whether he had any telephonic talk with Shri Ashok Bhatt or Shri Gordhan Zadafia on 27-2-2002 and if he had a talk with either of them, what was the nature of that talk.

2. Shri Tanmay Mehta, who was the then PA to the Chief Minister to submit an affidavit to the Commission stating therein whether he had any telephonic talk with Shri Jaydeep Patel on 28-2-2002 and 1-3-2002 and if he had a talk with him, what was the nature of that talk.

3. Shri Sanjay Bhavsar, who was then the PA to the Chief Minister to submit an affidavit to this Commission stating therein whether he had any telephonic talk with Shri Jaydeep Patel on 27-2-2002, 28-2-2002 and 1-3-2002 and if he had a talk with him, what was the nature of that talk.

The above orders amongst others was passed by the Commission while declining to issue summons to the Chief Minister Shri Narendra Modi as well as to Shri Ashok Bhatt, the then Health Minister, Shri Gordhan Zadafia, the then Home Minister, Shri R.J. Sawani, the then D.C.P, Zone V of Ahmedabad.

The Jan Sangharsh Manch has decided to challenge the order of the Commission before the High court of Gujarat to the extent where the commission had declined to issue summons to the Chief Minister.

Will Ishrat Jahan Get Justice?

OPINION (Vol. 1, Issue 2, September 2009)

Sriram Ananth


On June 15th 2004, a 19-year old Mumbai student, Ishrat Jahan, was killed in an “encounter” by the Gujarat police along with three others, on the outskirts of Ahmedabad. The Gujarat state government and police claimed that she was part of a team of Lashkar-e-Tayyaba operatives who were planning to assassinate Chief Minister Narendra Modi and other senior BJP leaders for their role in the state-led, anti-Muslim violence of 2002. According to the FIR filed by the police after the killings, they had received intelligence that terrorists were planning to come by car from Mumbai directly to Gandhinagar to conduct their assassinations and were killed in an alleged gun-battle with the police near Ahmedabad.

The version of the police had numerous loopholes to begin with as argued in the court by advocate Mukul Sinha, First, it is curious that the Gujarat police upon receiving this supposed tip-off, didn’t inform Maharashtra police to intercept the car and arrest those inside it or even why they didn’t intercept the car right at the border of the state, instead waiting for them to come all the way to Ahmedabad. Second, in the encounter the police said that one of the occupants took position with an AK-47 and started firing, yet there were no injuries to police nor signs of any gun-battle, while all four occupants were killed (this, of course is the standard line parroted in Indian police reports of staged encounter-killings). In the present case, the complainant is from the crime branch, the person who recorded the statement is also from the crime branch, the encounter was carried out by the crime branch and the investigation was also carried out by the crime branch. Therefore, one cannot expect fair investigation from the same agency

Finally, the so-called encounter was led by none other than the notorious “encounter specialist” and a trigger-happy police officer of Modi, DG Vanzara. Vanzara and his team who are now in Sabarmati prison charged for the killings of Saurabuddin Sheikh and Kauser Bi. Their involvement in the encounter of Tulsi prajapati (another witness in the same case) is being investigated under the order of Supreme Court. State government has agreed to deposit Rs. ten lakhs as compensation in Supreme Court.

Ishrat might well have been just another statistic in the long litany of human rights violations perpetrated upon the people by the state of Gujarat.

In a brave stand taken by Ishrat’s mother, Shamima Kausar filed a petition for a CBI probes into the killings. She disputed the investigation led by the local crime branch, saying it was a fabricated case, that her daughter was not involved in any terrorist organization, and demanded a fair probe into the killings. Waging a legal battle with the support of Jan Sangarsh Manch’s lawyer and activist, Mukul Sinha, Shamima has now dealt a small, symbolic blow to Modi’s fascist state with the Gujarat High Court setting up a Special Investigation Team to probe the incident. This was announced by Justice KS Zhaveri in early August, with the court declining the request for a CBI probe but set up a three-member team comprising senior police officers of the state to investigate the Ishrat Jahan encounter case. The team, consisting of additional DGP Pramod Kumar(convener), IG Mohan Jha and DIG JK Bhatt, has been asked to submit its report within three months.

Fascism Through Farce

OPINION (Vol. 1, Issue 1, August 2009)

Sriram Ananth

If the 2002 anti-Muslim pogrom in Gujarat led by the Sangh Parivar showcased the execution of fascism through cold-blooded violence, the Nanavati Commission , even after seven years has unraveled nothing to give justice to the victims.

Throughout these seven years however, one movement has bravely withstood the odds and fought the good fight. A people’s David against a venomous multi-headed Goliath, Jan Sangarsh Manch has left no stone unturned to publicly corner both the state and the Commission (now synonymous with one another) in its fight for justice. Withstanding heavy pressure and intimidation early on as well as later laughable attempts at legal badgering from the state, JSM has doggedly pursued a legal struggle in bringing the main leaders of the pogrom to book.

Most recently, in what can be a huge shot in the arm for justice, JSM retrieved phone records clearly pointing to the role of numerous leaders in the 2002 pogrom, especially in the massacres of Naroda Patiya and Naroda Gam, including records from Narendra Modi’s office. Based on this evidence, a petition has been filed for the Special Investigation Team to investigate into the role and conduct of the CM and other leaders in both the communal handling of the Godhra incident as well as their involvement in the post-Godhra pogrom. The phone records along with the extra-judicial confessions of numerous mid-rung Sangh Parivar leaders during the 2008 Tehelka sting operations have shown beyond a shadow of doubt the venomous culpability of the Sangh Parivar in the 2002 pogrom.

It remains to be seen how much longer it will take for justice to be served, and what more venomous counter-measures the fascist state will take in protecting their cowardly behinds. However Jan Sangarsh Manch has proved that even in the heart of fascism in India, progressive civil society can ultimately prevail if it’s willing to fight it out. In standing up to the fascists with a smile, telling them that they can lash out at us all they want but no matter what, we will not be terrorised into submission, a small battle has already been won. The people’s David will indeed prevail, and the fascist Goliath will fall, history beckons it to…however the path will not be easy or short, and will not be lacking in struggle.

Hooch Tragedy in Gujarat and JSM's intervention

ARTICLE (Vol. 1, Issue 1, August 2009)

Sriram Ananth

The tragic death of over 150 people, primarily from the toiling unorganized labour class, brought to light the deep contradictions and class-based hypocrisy in Gujarat’s longstanding policy on prohibition.

History has shown us that prohibition has never worked as a policy, giving rise to the mafia and organized criminal syndicates in the US in the 1920s and 1930s, that ultimately also infiltrated trade unions. Due to prohibition Gujarat has an alternate, underground economy on both country-made liquor as well as Indian Made Foreign Liquor (IMFL). This alternate economy runs into many thousands of crores, with the tentacles of corruption and beneficiaries stretching right from the petty beat constable all the way to MLAs and MPs. In a stark manifestation of ludicrous hypocrisy, the Gujarat state government even asked the central government for Rs. 3000 crore as compensation for losses incurred due to the implementation of its own prohibition policy in the name of Gandhi! This they calculate as approximately 10% of the alternate liquor econonmy occurring to the state, which pegs the economy at around Rs. 30,000 crore, even from a conservative standpoint as per the state’s own calculations.

The hooch tragedy resulted in numerous organizations as well as the corrupt Congress Party opposition in the state going on rallies demanding stricter implementation of prohibition and calls for further punitive measures. Nowhere were the actual victims seen as worthy of attention, with some portions of public discourse even suggesting that they be refused compensation since they were drinking.

The class-oppressive nature of the discourse was easy to see, as the elite and upper classes would have no cause to worry since they would be able to access high-quality bootlegged liquor!

Once again it required the intervention of Jan Sangarsh Manch in a dharna on July 17^th in front of the Town Hall in Ahmedabad, to expose the hypocrisy of the prevailing discourse, and demand compensation for the victims in addition to punishment for the state and police officials involved in the hooch tragedy. Furthermore, in a sharply progressive deviation from the oppressive mainstream climate on the issue, JSM called for a review of prohibition in the state and a state-wide debate on the merits of such a problematic policy. JSM also offered full legal support to the families of the victims in their struggle for justice.

Indeed the immediate chord struck in the hearts of the affected people with JSM’s stand could be seen in a spontaneous rally supported by JSM at Kantodia Vaas, the main site of the tragedy and a centre for illicit country-made liquor. At the rally the masses readily stood with JSM and were steadfastly keen on engaging in a struggle for the justice due to them.