Teesta Setalvad is a known
anti-Sangh Parivar activist. A large section of the media treats her as a
heroine, who is instrumental in getting ‘justice’ for the victims (of only one
community, hundreds of Hindus also killed even after Godhra find no space either in the media nor for
Teesta) of post-Godhra riots. On 19 February 2020 she was seen at Shaheen Bagh, Delhi.
Here, let us see what role she has
played. Many things about her are not generally known. Some people wrongly
think she started all this after the Godhra massacre of 27 February 2002 &
subsequent riots (in which both Hindus and Muslims died and suffered). She
started this anti-BJP, anti-Sangh Parivar campaign in 1993 after the Mumbai
riots. Launched a magazine “Communalism Combat.” Her dangerous deeds
on the issues of the 2002 riots need to be seen.
The Times of India’s report of 14 April 2009 was as under:
“NGOs, Teesta spiced up Gujarat
riot incidents: SIT
Dhananjay Mahapatra, TNN Apr 14, 2009, 12.13pm IST
NEW DELHI: The Special Investigation
Team responsible for the arrests of those accused in Gujarat riots has severely
censured NGOs and social activist Teesta Setalvad who campaigned for the riot victims.
In a significant development, the
SIT led by former CBI director R K Raghavan told the Supreme Court on Monday
that the celebrated rights activist cooked up macabre tales of wanton killings.
Many incidents of killings and
violence were cooked up, false charges were levelled against then police chief
P C Pandey and false witnesses were tutored to give evidence about imaginary
incidents, the SIT said in a report submitted before a Bench comprising
Justices Arijit Pasayat, P Sathasivam and Aftab Alam.
The SIT said it had been alleged in
the Gulbarg Society case that Pandey, instead of taking measures to protect
people facing the wrath of rioteers, was helping the mob. The truth was that he
was helping with hospitalisation of riot victims and making arrangements for
police bandobast, Gujarat counsel, senior advocate Mukul Rohtagi, said quoting
from the SIT report.
Rohtagi also said that 22 witnesses,
who had submitted identical affidavits before various courts relating to riot
incidents, were questioned by the SIT which found that they had been tutored
and handed over the affidavits by Setalvad and that they had not actually
witnessed the riot incidents.
The SIT also found no truth in the
following incidents widely publicised by the NGOs:
* A pregnant Muslim woman Kausar
Banu was gangraped by a mob, who then gouged out the foetus with sharp weapons
* Dumping of dead bodies into a well
by rioters at Naroda Patiya
* Police botching up investigation
into the killing of British nationals, who were on a visit to Gujarat and
unfortunately got caught in the riots
Rohtagi said: “On a reading of
the report, it is clear that horrendous allegations made by the NGOs were
false. Stereotyped affidavits were supplied by a social activist and the
allegations made in them were found untrue.”
After this, Teesta Setalvad denied
that report of Times of India and claimed that the mention of tutoring
witnesses was of the Gujarat Government, and not the SIT. Her CJP wrote an article of denial. This denial was published 2 days
later (in the print edition on 16 April 2009) at the exact place and spot where
the original article had been published the previous say (not in the ‘Letters
to the Editor’ column). This denial was responded to by a counter-article by The Times of India’s reporter
at that very place on the same day [It was her denial vs Times of India’s
counter-reply], wherein he said that the report was indeed of the SIT and not
of the Gujarat Government.
This incidentally also shows how the
‘secularist’ newspapers behave. When The Times of India misquoted Narendra Modi
on 3 March 2002 by falsely accusing him of using Newton’s Third Law,
it did so in the headlines. It did not even publish Modi’s denial in the
‘Letters to the Editor’ column until many days. Only a few days later did it
publish Modi’s denial in a remote corner. While it should have immediately
published a denial AT THE SAME PLACE with the same prominence.
Narendra Modi had never said such a
thing and no other paper except for Times of India had carried the misquote
in its original reportage. But later on, numerous editorials were penned on the
basis of this canard. The quote in the said paper was immediately recycled and
rehashed by the rest of the print and audio visual media. At that sensitive
time, inflammatory and defamatory reporting was done by the ‘secularist’ media,
which should have been prosecuted under the law. All his denials were thrown in
the dustbin. In this case, Teesta’s denial should not have been published at
the same place on the same page of the report, since it was a WRONG denial, and
that report was indeed of the SIT.
Also note here that the SIT
appointed by the Supreme Court with known anti-Modi judges like Arijit Pasayat
and Aftab Alam debunked the claim of Sanjiv Bhat that
he was present at the meeting of Narendra Modi with police offiers and other
officials on the night of 27 February 2002 and blamed NGOs and Teesta Setalvad
for forcibly trying to fabricate something against Narendra Modi. This SIT said
that not only was Sanjiv Bhat not present in that meeting (“He asked
Officer Rahul Sharma to find out if the late Haren Pandya was present in that
meeting and also to tell Rahul Sharma his (Sanjiv Bhat’s) own mobile records.
If Bhat was present then why would he need to ask Sharma if Pandya was present
or not and the fact that he asked for his mobile records on the night of 27
February shows that he does not recollect his movements on the night of 27
Feb”) but Teesta Setalvad was fully aware of the truth and was a part of
the conspiracy to frame and fabricate this lie against Modi along with Sanjiv
Bhat.
This is a must read report of the SIT.
To know the full truth of that 27
Feb meeting and the claim of Sanjiv Bhat, read this.
Teesta Setalvad herself admitted in
an interview to SAB TV in December 2004 (Swati
Chaturvedi was the anchor) that Combat Communalism was being
given funds by the then CPI (M) government of West Bengal. Combat Communalism
also gave full-page advertisements in English dailies in 1999 before the Lok
Sabha polls urging people not to vote for the BJP. When it was asked how it
managed to get funds (the ads cost more than 1.5 crore rupees), Teesta Setalvad admitted that Congress, Left etc.
gave them money.
A must read article on this is in India Today weekly dated 5 April 2010 titled
“Inhuman rights”, which says:
“Soon after the riots, the
human rights activists and the Muslim witnesses had alleged that a pregnant
woman Kausarbanu’s womb was ripped open by rioters and the foetus was flung out
at the point of a sword. The gruesome incident was seen as the worst-possible
example of medieval vandalism in the modern age. Last week, eight years after
the alleged incident, Dr J.S. Kanoria, who conducted the post-mortem on
Kausarbanu’s body on March 2, 2002, denied that any such incident had ever
happened. Instead, he told the court: “After the post-mortem, I found that
her foetus was intact and that she had died of burns suffered during the
riot.” Later Kanoria, 40, told INDIA TODAY, “I have told the court
what I had already written in my post-mortem report eight years ago. The press
should have checked the report before believing that her womb was ripped open.
As far as I remember, I did her post-mortem at noon on March 2, 2002.”
A careful study of the three police
complaints, claiming that Kausarbanu’s womb was ripped open by the rioters,
shows several loopholes. While one complaint accuses Guddu Chara, one of the
main accused in the Naroda Patiya case, of ripping open Kausarbanu’s womb,
extracting her foetus and flinging it with a sword; another complaint accuses
Babu Bajrangi, yet another accused in the case, of doing the act. A third
complaint, on the other hand, does not name the accused but describes the
alleged act.”
To know the truth of that fake
claim, read this article by us. The doctor who did the post
mortem found the womb intact. On 18 March 2010, The Times of India
reported the doctor’s testimony to the trial court given on 17 March 2010. In
that report it said: “In April last year (2009), the Gujarat government
argued before the SC on this case after SIT submitted a report in a sealed
cover. The government’s claim was that SIT had refuted charges that Kausar
Bano’s fetus was pulled out of her womb and killed by sword before her eyes by
violent mob. Senior counsel Mukul Rohatgi contended that such allegations
levelled by an NGO were proved false by SIT report. (Our comment: The Supreme
Court-appointed SIT had already said in its report in April
2009 that there is no truth in the allegation that Kausar Bano’s
womb was ripped open and foetus taken out. Note that this SIT was appointed by
highly anti-Modi judges like Aftab Alam, Arijit Pasayat etc). Nearly a year
later, the doctor, considered a neutral government witness, has deposed the
same before the trial court.”
So, Teesta’s guilt – subversion of
truth. UTTERING STARK, INFLAMMATORY AND DEFAMATORY LIES by claiming that the
womb was ripped open and the foetus was flung out at the point of a sword.
Violation of 153-A of Indian Penal Code by instigating Muslims by infuriating
them needlessly. Violation of Section 500 of IPC (Defamation), by needlessly
blaming BJP and Narendra Modi for this and defaming them saying “Such
medieval acts occurred under Modi’s rule”.
Also tarnishing the fair name of
India worldwide, by needlessly fabricating such lies worldwide. The shocking
part is that even after the SIT report quoted by The Times of India on
14 April 2009 saying that no woman’s womb was ripped open and fetus taken out,
as well as doctor Kanoria showing his report of 2 March 2002 to the court in
March 2010, Teesta continued to hold her ground and
repeat the lie! What audacity. It is she who has to prove that such
a thing ever happened, she has to show a post-mortem report saying that a womb
was ripped open and not intact. She cannot do that, and can only lie.
The India Today (5 April
2010) report continues:
“Modi will also have reasons to
smile at the affidavits filed by the Muslim witnesses in the SC in 2003 at the
behest of Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) and Teesta Setalvad on the basis
of which the trial in nine cases were stalled for six long years. The most
glaring hole is in the affidavit of Nanumiya Malek, a key witness in the Naroda
Gam case. In his affidavit before the SC filed on November 15, 2003, Malek
stated that a newly married woman called Madina, who lost four of her
relatives, including her husband in the riots, had been raped by the rioters.
Malek’s affidavit states: “I
was witness to the crimes of murder and rape that took place on Madina and her
family. I also saw seven people being burnt alive, including four orphans. I
request the SC to keep the details of this rape victim confidential since she
is alive and use it only for the purpose of trial and conviction of the
rapists.” But on May 5, 2009, in his statement before the SIT, Malek said:
“I had wrongly claimed that Madina had been raped. I made the charge
because of Teesta Setalvad’s pressure. I kept on telling her not to include
that charge in my affidavit, yet it was included.”
In her statement before the SIT on May 20, 2008, Madina, who
has remarried now, said, “The charge made by Malek claiming that I was
raped by a riotous mob is false. I wasn’t raped.When the riotous mob
put my house on fire, I tried to run but was attacked by a rioter who injured
me with a knife. Later I managed to merge in a Muslim crowd.”
This is direct evidence of
fabrication done in this case. This is enough evidence to prosecute Teesta
Setalvad in this case. The report also says :
“There are six other affidavits
filed by different Muslim witnesses on November 15, 2003, that wantonly allege
rape in the Naroda Gram and Naroda Patiya riot cases without giving any
details. Interestingly, all the affidavits have a uniform language: “Over 110
persons were not simply killed, but raped and mutilated as well, including
young children. We urge the SC to stay the trials and transfer them to a
neighbouring state and also order fresh investigation.” The affidavits state
that they had been filed at the behest of Setalvad and in the presence of her
co-activist Rais Khan.
If this wasn’t enough, other glaring
attempts by human rights activists to tutor witnesses have come to the fore.
For example, soon after the Gulbarg massacre in which Ehsan Jafri was killed,
nearly a dozenMuslim witnesses told the police that Jafri had fired in
self-defence, killed a rioter and injured 14 others.They also said that
this led the mob to resort to violence and attack Muslims in Gulbarg with
vengeance. But almost half of them who deposed before the special court have
retracted from this statement…
When the SIT started taking
statements of witnesses in the Gulbarg Society case, around 20 witnesses came
with typed statements. But the SIT objected to it, citing Section 161 of the
CRPC, saying that the police must record the statement of a witness. So when
the SIT forced the witnesses to give their statement during the interrogation,
there was a vast difference between the ‘readymade typed’ statements and the
oral evidence that the police had received earlier.
As a senior lawyer defending the accused puts it: “The
witnesses under the influence of the human rights activists didn’t allow
videotaping of their statements while they were being recorded. There is an
obvious attempt on the part of activists to dictate not just the SIT, but also
the courts.”
This is also what The Times of India
had reported in April 2009 from the SIT’s report. It
had reported:
“Page 9 of the SIT report on
the Gulbarga Society carnage on February 28, 2002, says: ‘Insistence of 19
witnesses to take on record their signed statements which according to them
were prepared by Smt Teesta Setalvad and advocate Tirmiji’, the reference here
is to witnesses giving signed computerized statements which were not accepted
by the Investigating Officer (IO) as under Section 161 the officer is required
to write the statement of witnesses after interrogating them personally. The
SIT report says on page 10 ‘All of them had brought with them ready-made
statements prepared on computer and requested IO to take them on record. IO
explained to them that according to law they had to be questioned and examined
and their statements reduced in writing by the IO.’ It goes on to say ‘On
questioning them in respect of the typed statements, all 3 of them stated that
the computerized prepared statements were given to them by Smt Teesta Setalvad and
advocate Tirmiji and that they had merely signed and initialed on such prepared
statements.’ The report goes on to say that ‘There are discrepancies between
the prepared statements and statements recorded by the IO. In respect of 6
witnesses, there are contradictory statements relating to the names of the
accused they were linking with (the) crime.’ Page 11 says, when ‘questioned
about the discrepancies’, the six witnesses ‘stated that they had prepared the
statements and not Setalvad and advocate Tirmiji’. In other words, the latter
witnesses changed their version about who had prepared their signed
statements…”
This is enough to know the tutoring
of witnesses, creation of false ‘evidence’ by Teesta Setalvad. In any normal
country, she would be prosecuted and be behind bars on basis of this
information of the SIT. In India, of course, any attempt to prosecute her is
condemned as ‘vindictive action’ and there is support garnered for her in
global media outlets.
In January 2014, there was an FIR filed against her on the basis of complaints
made by Gulbarg Society victims who alleged that Teesta pocketed money
collected for the benefit of the victims. As expected, the apologists came to her defence alleging
‘vindictive action’ ignoring the statements of the victims completely.
The Teesta-defenders and apologists are
guilty of implying that anyone can pocket money collected in name of victims
and no complaint should be registered on basis of victims’ grievances that the
money meant for them was pocketed by the collectors. The apologists included die-hard anti-RSS activists and included
most biased judges as well. They were Romila Thapar (Professor Emerita of
History, Jawaharlal Nehru University); Justice B.N. Srikrishna (former judge of
the Supreme Court of India); Deepak Nayyar (distinguished economist, and former
Vice-Chancellor of the University of Delhi); Justice P.B. Sawant (former judge
of the Supreme Court and former chairman of the Press Council of India, and
also a judge who was a part of the Concerned Citizens Tribunal, which gave a
ridiculous & fake report full of lies on the 2002 violence, and whitewashed
the heinous crime of Muslims of Godhra by ruling out that any mob had torched
the train!); Kuldip Nayar (senior columnist and author); Nirupam Sen (former
Indian ambassador to the United Nations); and Justice B.G. Kolse Patil (former
judge of the Bombay High Court, but another credibility-less anti-Hindu
fanatic, who alleged that Hemant Karkare was killed by
Hindutva-minded policemen on 26/11, and that former Prime Minister Atal Bihari
Vajpayee always took women with him on his foreign trips).
Among other crimes Setalvad wrote in
her article “What ails Gujarat- I and
II” published in CPM party weekly Peoples Democracy in July 2006:
“There was a state sponsored genocide of Muslims in Gujarat in which 2500
Muslims were killed”. Her words in her article are “Ironically for at
least five years before the state sponsored genocide that shocked to the root,
Indian democracy and secularism, the signs were there. Arms training camps by
the RSS/VHP/BD, trisul diksha ceremonies that were arming youth with
manipulated and malevolent tales against the minority and infiltration of state
and civil society organizations to sing Hindutva’s tune. Since 2002,
over 220 persons are officially, by Gujarat state government records recognized
as missing after the 2002 carnage in which 2,500 persons belonging to one
community were massacred.”
This is also enough evidence to
prosecute her. First there was no genocide in Gujarat at all- Muslims were
equally on the offensive even after Godhra. Second, there was no ‘state-
sponsoring’; far from being a party to the violence the state government
managed to actually stop riots in 3 days. All evidences of this are given in www.gujaratriots.com
Thirdly 2500 Muslims were not
killed; as per UPA Government’s figures 790 Muslims and 254 Hindus were killed.
For inflating the number of Muslims killed and ignoring the Hindus killed, too,
she can be prosecuted. Again, instigating Muslims, blatant violation of 153-A,
and Section 500 by defaming the BJP and Gujarat Government through exaggeration
and stark lies, by Teesta.
Another lie – she claims that over
120 people were killed in Naroda Patiya and that too before the 7 year period
expired. The fact is even after the 7 year period expired and all missing were
declared dead, the number of people killed in Naroda Patiya is 95 and earlier
figure was 84. Setalvad deliberately exaggerates the number of people killed
despite knowing fully well the true number so as to malign the BJP and Narendra
Modi. By that logic if she gives 2500 as the number of Muslims killed in the
riots, 1700 more than the true number, then others can say 1759 Hindus were
killed by Muslims in Godhra, which will be 1700 more than the true number of
59. If right-wingers do that, allegations will be made against them for
exaggerating and instigating Hindus, inflaming Hindu sentiments!
This article just covers *some* of
Teesta’s misdeeds. To know many more of her issues, many more articles will be
needed. The mainstream media, eg channels like NDTV, Aaj Tak, India Today, etc
are fully aware of all these acts of Teesta Setalvad, but chose to cover up and
suppress all of them, lest her reality be exposed. Hopefully, we will expose
more of her misdeeds in some more articles.
[Some part of this article was first
published by us here]