Sunday, December 23, 2012

Teesta Setalvad's crimes- evidence against her

Teesta Setalvad is a known anti-Sangh Parivar activist. 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. Here, let us see what role she has played. Many things about her are not generally known. The fact is that there have been a world-record 443 convictions in Gujarat for Godhra and after, while the convictions in previous riots of 1969 and 1985 which were far far worse than the 2002 riots under Congress rule were 3 to 4. Yes only 3 to 4 people convicted.
Teesta claims (and also the media) that the convictions could be made possible because of the SIT and inspite of the Gujarat Government. Absolute trash. SIT is seeing only selected few cases. In other cases SIT is not involved at all and yet many many have been convicted. Actually there were at least 95 convictions- 61 Hindus and 34 Muslims before the SIT was even set up. As for the convictions in SIT seen cases, most of the convicted had already been arrested by the Gujarat Police. Most of those arrested by the SIT were ACQUITTED. For example in the Sadarpura case 31 were convicted, 29 had already been arrested by Gujarat police. Only 2 of the 21 arrested by SIT were convicted- i.e. 19 out of 21 arrested by SIT were acquitted. Even in Naroda Patiya case, 21 out of the 32 convicted were already arrested by the Gujarat police.

 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."

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 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. 

  Zakia Jafri and Teesta Setalvad’s complaint against Narendra Modi and 62 others has named a man as Babubhai Rajput, worker of the BJP as accused No 24. The SIT after probing the case found that no such person was in existence at the time of the 2002 riots! (On page 19 of its report). He of course does not live at the address provided in the complaint now.

The complaint has a charge that the Anand district police chief B S Jebalia was not only a witness to the massacre at Ode village soon after the Godhra carnage of 27 February 2002 but was also an abettor in it through a blatant connivance. The complainant obviously did not know that the truth is that another police officer, B D Vaghela, and not Jebalia , was posted as Anand district police chief at that time!

Zakia-Teesta’s complaint also says that the then Chief Secretary Subba Rao participated in the February 27 (2002) night meeting in which it alleged Chief Minister gave orders to officers to direct law enforcement agencies to allow Hindus to give vent to their feelings in reaction to Godhra carnage. But the fact is Subba Rao was on leave on that day and instead of him it was acting Chief Secretary S K Varma who participated in the meeting. This blunder has been made by many Narendra Modi-baiters, such as weekly Outlook in its article dated 3 June 2002 trying to nail Modi forcibly. Obviously, Zakia and Teesta engaged some people to do some search and make allegations. This single blunder is enough to see through the claims of people like Zakia and Teesta Setalvad and magazines like Outlook.

   More details of this complaint’s childish nature and numerous mistakes are given comprehensively in the book, but not in this website. A special chapter on the SIT report is also in the book, which reveals everything about this complaint’s nature and the SIT’s observations. These false allegations show that Zakia and Teesta are guilty of making false charges, fabricating false evidence to prosecute innocent persons, and also for defamation of innocent people. Perjury has been committed, and Teesta and Zakia need to be prosecuted for their lies and false complaints.
[Copyright ©]

 Teesta Setalvad herself admitted in an interview to SAB TV in December 2004 that Combat Communalism is given funds by the CPI (M) government of West Bengal. Combat Communalism 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 crores), it admitted that Congress, Left etc gave them money.

It is also alleged that Teesta Setalvad's NGOs pocketed some of the money meant for riot victims.

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); 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).

After this, the victims of the Society who were all Muslims and who had complained against Teesta and company, in an open letter, slammed the biased retired Supreme Court & High Court Judges for supporting Teesta Setalvad.

Teesta Setalvad claimed on 11 March 2010 that- "There is enough evidence against Narendra Modi". Actually there is enough evidence against Teesta Setalvad- not Modi. Now we come to the part of evidence against Teesta Setalvad.

Her former aide Rais Khan has made many allegations against her. Teesta alleged in numerous articles that he is on 'BJPs payrolls' (while in reality she herself confessed to have got money from the Congress and Left) and associated with VHP etc. Rais Khan then filed a defamation suit and the Police, after investigating the things said that there is no basis in her allegations against Rais Khan and that she is liable for prosecution.

A must read article on this is by Uday Mahurkar in India Today weekly dated 5 April 2010 titled "Inhuman rights":

"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."

So- Teesta's guilt- subversion of truth. UTTERING STARK 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 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 irony is that even after the SIT report of 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!

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 dozen Muslim 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.” Last week, INDIA TODAY quizzed Setalvad about the charge of tutoring the witnesses and creating false evidence before the courts in the 2002 Gujarat riot cases. 
Her response: “I am under no obligation to respond to your questions.”…”

  Among other crimes Setalvad writes 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 youh with manipulated and malevolent tales against the minority and infiltration of state and civil society organisations to sing Hindutva’s tune.Since 2002, over 220 persons are officially, by Gujarat state government records recognised 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 She has been challenged to prove this part and she has not responded.

Third 2500 Muslims were not killed as per UPA figures 790 Muslims and 254 Hindus were killed. For inflating the number of Muslims killed and ignoring the number of Hindus killed she can also be prosecuted. Again, instigating Muslims violation of 153-A- and 500 by defaming the BJP and Gujarat Government through exaggeration and stark lies.

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 83. 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 we can say 1759 Hindus were killed by Muslims in Godhra 1700 more than the true number of 59. If we do that allegations will be made against us for exaggerating and instigating Hindus inflaming Hindu sentiments.

The blog "Evidence against Teesta Setalvad" says:

1. Teesta Setalvad 's former colleague Rais Khan has made startling revelations by filing an affidavit before the Nanavati commission... extracts from his first ever TV interview. View Interview: Video

2. Yasmeen Banu Sheikh, Best Bakery Case prime prosecution witness has accused Teesta Setalvad for forcing her to lie in the Trial court at Mumbai. View: Video
Yasmeen Banu Sheikh, a prime prosecution witness in the Best Bakery Case in her affidavit dated 17/06/2010 to the Chief Justice Mumbai H.C. has accused Teesta Setalvad for forcing her to lie in the Trial court at Mumbai. View Affidavit (Gujarati): Click

As the Judge ignored her letter, she filed a petition in the HC in April 2011. Note that when the Mumbai High Court gave its judgment on the Best Bakery case in July 2012, acquitting 5 of the 9 convicted by Abhay Thipase's lower court on 24 Feb 2006, and upholding conviction of 4, it did give a statement that "the 4 witnesses (on whose testimony the court relied and convicted the 4 accused) do not seem to have been influenced by anyone including Teesta Setalvad". Teesta has simply quoted this part of the HC judgment. The court has not uttered a word on Teesta influencing OTHER WITNESSES in the case or in other cases. It simply talks of these 4 witnesses on whose testimony the court relied heavily and convicted the 4. The court has also reserved its decision on the plea filed by YASMEEN SHEIKH in April 2011 the key witness of the Best Bakery case in which Yasmeen said that the statements she gave against the 17 accused in the trial court of Abhay Thipase on the basis of which 9 were convicted were WRONG and that TEESTA INDUCED HER to lie. The Mumbai HC also expunged unwarranted comments by judge Abhay Thipase of the trial court who had no business to comment on defence lawyers of the accused.

3. Headlines Today journalist Rahul Singh has alleged in a affidavit submitted to the Dy. Superintendent of Police, Lunawada that Teesta Setalvad did not tell him that the Pandarwada graves were legal. She did not inform him that she had not taken proper permission from the authorities to dig up the graves and that she knew that the bodies were buried by the police with proper procedure. View Affidavit: Click
Teesta Setalvad claimed to have 'unearthed hidden graves' in December 2005 to claim that more people were killed and their bodies buried in unknown graves, but it turned out that the graves were all proper and well-documented and she simply dug them up without permission, trying to make false claims.

4. Raiskhan Aziz Khan Pathan an ex-employee of Teesta Setalvad 's Citizen for Justice & Peace (CJP) has filed an affidavit on 26th September, 2011 with the Chief Justice of Mumbai High Court for the re-trial of the Best Bakery case. He has in his affidavit to the Chief Justice narrated the whole sequence of incidents - of how witnesses were brought to Mumbai, kept in Bhindi Bazaar, and tutored by Teesta Setalvad for giving false testimonies in the court. He has also requested the court to direct foreignsic science labs to do lie detector / polygraph test of himself & Teesta Setalvad to bring the truth before the court. View Affidavit: Click

5. Raiskhan Aziz Khan Pathan has written to the Chief Justice of the Mumbai High Court seeking his help in view of the threats he has received from Muslim fundamentalists on behalf of Teesta Setalvad. View Request: Click

Teesta Setalvad is accused of hacking ex-employee Rais Khan's Email ID - Police Complaint. View Police Complaint: Click

 Teesta Setalvad 's NGO paid Gujarat Riot witnesses. Ex-employee of Teesta Setalvad 's Citizen for Justice & Peace (CJP), Rais Khan's Bank Statements. View Bank Statements: Click, To be read in conjunction with: Click

 Teesta Setalvad committed perjury by signing Zaheera Shaikh's affidavit which was filed in the Supreme Court in CRL.M.P. No. 1250-1253/2004. View Affidavit: Click

Defamation complaint filed by Rais Khan, former aide of social activist Teesta Setalvad, before a Magisterial court in Ahmedabad, Gujarat. View Complaint: Click

 Rais Khan Pathan, former associate of Teesta Setalvad, writes an open letter to Justice P.B. Sawant listing all the criminal cases & charges against Teesta Setalvad. View Letter: Click

(For Pointwise 1 to 5 compilation- kind courtesy )


  1. Teesta Setalwad shud b proceeded against for perjury, promoting enmity amongst communities.



  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

  5. Unless the charges mentioned in the blog are brought up against her in the proper court of law, it would not be possible to stop her continuous lies and insinuations. This is a golden god sent oppurtunity for BJP and Modi to prove that they have been more sinned against than sinning. Hope the findings of the SIT would be accepted by a court of law if charges indeed are brought against her. Else this would eventually be forgotten

  6. Teesta Setalwad would not have been able to do all this without the help of media, specially English media. The honesty, integrity and patriotism of both the owners and editors of almost all English media is questionable. Crooked people like Teesta Setalwad who appear to be on the payroll of forces who want India to remain unstable, weak and poor take active part in sensationalizing and falsifying the facts. The English media actively distort the facts further for their financial gains. Handling of 2002 riots by Modi government was one of the most efficient and prompt in free India.
    The law will catch up soon with Teesta Setalwad for both her embezzlement of victim's money and perjury in various courts. For the first time a Padmashree will go to jail for long-long time. It also reflects on the Congress who awarded her a Padmashree.

  7. What the author of this blog did not tell us:
    The important points about these SITs which are not acknowledged/known:
    The SC merely instituted the SIT, it did not pick its members. People forget that the SIT in Gujarat was famous because it was one of the first out-of-state judicial investigation into 2002.
    The members of the SIT into Gujarat were suggested by Gujarat's counsel Mukul Rohatgi (who became AGI right after Modi became PM) and an Amicus Curae (Harish Salve) who was controversially also brokering deals with Modi's government at the time, and chose to not continue after just the one year (replaced by Raju Ramachandran).
    The original petition by Setalvad/Zakia's SLP/NHRC's request - did not ask for an SIT, but to move cases out of Gujarat. This precedent was set after the Best Bakery case proved even the Gujarat HC could be influenced as a court outside the state convicted those the former acquitted.
    The SC in its infinite wisdom chose to trust the government of Gujarat and instituted 9 Special Courts and an SIT under an ex-CBI chief. but who is known to be BJP inclined. The special prosecutor in the Gulberg case actually quit as he found the SIT investigators partisan, stubborn and willing to manipulate witnesses by force. The SIT members too were hounded to keep them in line - search for cases againt Geeta Johri and their recent status.
    The SIT didn't have any powers to search or arrest - it merely recorded statements of anyone willing to depose. Modi was never interrogated in a darkened room with the danda-treatment or given Sodium Pentothal, no - he was just interviewed in AC'ed room for 9 hours. This is a bit like a middling accountant employee cross-interviewing the CEO accused of fraud. It accepted the Nanavati-Shah's explanation (based on Gujarat's Railway GRP) into the trigger for 2002, which in itself was possible because the VHP nixed the only other investigation into the event - Umesh Chandra Banerjee Report that blamed Modi. This was done by abusing the technicality in a 50 year old law, not by proofreading it: VHP funded my battle against Banerjee panel: Bhatia.
    The SIT report hasn't reached the SC - they haven't read it, but only rejected a plea to reconstitute the SIT until it goes up the chain of courts.
    Only a lower court's magistrate has accepted the SIT, and the HC has rejected a plea against its acceptance.
    The SC did not monitor the SIT with equal ferocity throughout its investigation - notably it floundered after the interim report was submitted when the skulduggery was performed.
    Modi's Gujarat repeatedly pleaded with the SC to stop monitoring the SIT.
    SITs are worthless - a record 10 of them were instituted in 1984 by the Congress, and they didn't find anything.