Hindu Terror

by RVS Mani

  By 2013, it became obvious that the politically-powerful at that time were getting hit right across the face on account of the stand taken by some of us. Many believed in taking a back seat. Now the attempt is being made to peddle some of the same lies through the route of fiction.

  It is really challenging for any civil servant to take on the might of a powerful dispensation. But I have dared to do it. Let us see, how.

  Canard or a Sponsored Abhiyaan?

  WHILE I WAS in the University of Manchester, a faculty member of Indian origin, Rathin Roy, was working on a theme of dominant coalition. The essence of his theme was that a dominant coalition comprises political elites— ‘other governing elites’ in the parlance of Italian sociologist Vilfredo Pareto—who are highly-placed public servants and retired public servants serving sinecure, members of the judiciary in coalition with the non-governing elites from corporate houses, media, social activists including NGOs and they form what is known as ‘Public Opinion’.

  This public opinion, doctored or true, is used as ruse for framing public policy. No matter this public policy is at times at variance with the expectations and requirements of the public at large. Needless to say that every member of this group defined as ‘dominant coalition’ has his/her own axe to grind in furthering a public policy. This gets validated perfectly in the Indian context.

  The Ishrat Jahan story

  Recently I read a review of the book Miss Laila Armed and Dangerous written by Manu Joseph. The story line is predictable and seems to reiterate a particular narrative peddled by many in the media.

  There is a lot of hype created about dominance and overbearance of people of certain religious grouping that has a majority presence over the others who do not belong to this group. The author has sought to reconstruct the now well-known Ishrat Jahan case in his work of fiction to reinforce the narrative of how majority manipulation of a minority group took place in the Ishrat Jahan case.

  The character akin to Ishrat Jahan is named Laila Armed (the name in the fiction also betrays her ethnicity and Armed is a corrupted form of Ahmed which again is a reinforcement of the faith). Her companion in real life was Javed Mohammed Ghulam Sheik alias Pranesh Kumar Pillai, who was a small-time criminal in Mumbra who converted to Islam for marrying a Muslim woman (not Ishrat). Later, during his stay in the Gulf, this man was radicalised. The location is aptly captured as Mumbra. The IB officer involved, Rajinder Kumar, is given the fictitious character of Mukundan.

  The review in Outlook India of 23 October 2017 by Saikat Niyogi, titled Beware of Highwayman, states: Joseph’s novelistic intelligence lies in making Mukundan and Dr Vaid his two most fleshed-out characters. Through them, he plumbs the mental processes—a curious mix of half-truths and unreason—of the Sanghi and the Sangh1 supporter.

  I have not personally known Rajinder Kumar, the senior Intelligence Bureau officer who was victimised by the UPA government in the Ishrat Jahan case. But I have been exposed to the outputs generated by him. They were precise, accurate and actionable. I have publicly said so in my interview with Times Now on 1st March 2016.

  1 Member of the Bharatiya Jana Sangh, a precursor to the Bharatya Janata Party. It also denotes the supporters of the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh.

  IB official Rajinder Kumar had headed the Pakistan Desk in the Intelligence Bureau during his days. He had generated enormous amount of qualitative, precise and actionable inputs. His information had helped liquidate many ISI and Pakistansponsored sleeper cells in the country, used to recruit, prepare and arrange logistics for terror attacks in India. Every sleeper cell liquidated meant loss of time, money and resources for the Pakistani establishments controlling these cells. They also suffered collateral damages to their efforts in the jihadi2 recruitment process amongst local supporters in India.

  The Pakistani establishment had cultivated many supporters in the government and other positions, including in the media, who had to prove their loyalties to Pakistan. They had accepted payments in cash or kind, and it was now payback time for the pro-Pakistan Indians. They started a tirade both in the files of the North Block as well as through the judicial process and media against Rajinder Kumar and other loyal countrymen like him.

  The image novelist Joseph has portrayed of Rajinder Kumar through his character Mukunadan is criminal, capricious and smells of a larger conspiracy, as does the canard about the Intelligence Bureau per se in the book.

  The J&K narrative

  I do not think we are a nation of ingrates. But there are people in this country who are now known as ‘Libtards, Sickularists’ and many other such new terms. Even within these secular brigades, we have positions taken to prove that one group is more secular than the other a la, a detergent ad, ‘uski kameez se meri kameez zyada safed’.3

  2 Religious war.

  These ‘secular’ people have for many decades perpetuated a narrative where a majority community becomes the criminal.

  Not only Rajinder Kumar or Col Shrikant Purohit et al, but many anonymous innocent honest security personnel, who were defending the nation and were fighting for the ideals of the Preamble of the Constitution, preserving and protecting the integrity, sovereignty and security of India, were painted as ‘biased against the minority community’.

  At the same time, these very same ‘secular’ people extended their overwhelming support to many of those who were furthering an agenda of destabilising the nation. These people are known to have given speeches in the United States alleging minority persecution in India.

  They used sponsored trips to propagate the anti-national narrative under the garb of human rights, minority rights. They advocated right to self-determination in Kashmir, without having read the Instrument of Accession. They may not have read the 1953 Agreement, and many of the series of agreements between the then Chief Minister of J&K and India. They raised the call of jihad. They came out in support of persons who conspired to and attacked the temple of democracy, the Parliament of India. They invoked new remedies for a terrorist, like a Curative Petition, after a Presidential rejection of their clemency plea (this meant, all previous petitions filed in appeal before the Supreme Court and the President of India against the order of the lower judiciary was short on facts).

  In my view these people should have been charged for suppression of material facts under Section 218 of the Indian Penal Code. The irony of ironies is that the Supreme Court admitted their petition and heard their plea at wee hours of the morning. After rejection of the curative petition, the sloganeering in a prime institution like the Jawaharlal Nehru University had to be heard to be believed; ‘Afzal sharminda hain, tere qatil zinda hai’ was a furtherance of this narrative.

  3 My clothes are whiter than his.

  The Binayak Sen story

  These people did not bat an eyelid when a CRPF jawan injured in a Naxal attack in Chhattisgarh was denied first aid by a doctor made famous by these libtards. During my tenure in the Ministry of Home Affairs, Battalion No. 82 of the CRPF was posted there. I had met some jawans and officers from this Battalion coming to the Ministry on official errands. They would narrate in detail as to how this local doctor would refuse them first aid in the event of being injured in a crossfire. But the same doctor would extend not just treatment but also hospitality to the Naxals. I have been privy to many papers, conversations and even anecdotes from security personnel serving there at that time.

  This doctor and his wife, I was told, allowed their clinic to be used for holding strategy meetings of this criminal group known as Naxals. Spare a thought for the dead Superintendent of Police of Rajnandangaon who was killed by the Naxals. I hold the view that this decorated doctor, Binayak Sen, and his wife Ilina were conspirators. The government in power decorated this conspirator with a plum posting in an advisory role in the then Planning Commission. What were they planning? More such attacks?

  The story of the arms loot

  It may not be out of context to state here that the Gadhchiroli district of Maha
rashtra was also declared as Naxal-affected at that time. There were many reported ambushes between the Naxals and State Police. Readers can corroborate from the many replies to Questions in Parliament during the period that in many of these ambushes, very few police personnel lost their lives unlike in Chhattisgarh. But every time, policemen’s weapons were reportedly snatched by Naxals.

  Was it a pattern? Or was it a conspiracy? Or was it a partnership to discredit the neighbouring State government, which was not ruled by the then ruling dispensation at the Centre? Incidentally, Maharashtra was then ruled by the same political dispensation then sitting at the Centre, ie. the Congress party.

  Also it is important to note that whenever police lose their weapons, a procedure is established as per which a court of inquiry-type recording is made. Responsibility is fixed for loss of weapon and some of the policemen are penalised as per the rules of the State. But no such adherence or action was ever reported. Was the Congress-ruled State government actually helping the Naxals by supplying them weapons by trafficking it through their own police force? Incidentally, many police personnel posted in those areas will corroborate that in many of the small victories of the security forces in Dantewada, Kanker etc. the weapons seized from the captured and killed Naxals were with police markings.

  It is a sheer coincidence that I was in MHA at that time. I got to know the truth. Make no mistake. This is no work of fiction. Every word of informational value can be corroborated from court records, public records which can be accessed through RTI and broadcasts in media etc.

  In fact, it was a time when every truth had been replaced by a canard. One of my many objectives in bringing this testimony to light is to demolish narratives being peddled by Manu Joseph’s ilk and set the truth before my countrymen.

  Journey to the MHA

  I HAD BEEN working in the Department of Industrial Development which was rechristened as the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion.

  In 2000, the National Democratic Alliance government had returned to power after demitting office after a 13-month tenure in October 1999. I was posted in the office of the Development Commissioner, Small Scale Industries. A chance meeting in the then UNI canteen during lunch with a gentleman close to B B Ramiah, Member of Parliament, enabled me to offer my services to work with him. The MP had been appointed the Chairman of the MPLADS Committee and I became his Private Secretary. He was a man of erudition and an industrialist of repute. My services were placed on deputation to the Lok Sabha Secretariat in March 2000. I continued with him till he demitted office in April 2004.

  In May 2004, the United Progressive Alliance was voted to power. I am not affiliated with any political formation. On my return to my parent unit, I was posted to the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion in an insignificant placement.

  In September 2004, the then government notified the formation of the National Manufacturing Competitiveness Council.

  V Krishnamurthy was appointed the Chairman of this Council. He was a past doyen of Public Sector Undertakings who had hitherto served as Chairman of Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd, Steel Authority of India Limited, Maruti Udyog, Secretary in the Government of India, Member Planning Commission. I was then assigned to work in the National Manufacturing Competitiveness Council and was given the task of setting up the organisation. Unlike other organisations, this Council did not have office space and for nearly three months, another senior colleague with whom I had very close relationship and I operated mostly from the private office of the Chairman in Vasant Vihar.

  Thereafter, a Member Secretary was appointed in the Council. He was a retired IAS officer of the 1967 batch. He had retired as Secretary in the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion. This gentleman, for reasons best known to him, had some sense of caprice and rancour towards me. I was too much of a professional for his attitude to really bother me. Hence the entire year of 2005, I continued to work for the Council. I do not want to reveal the details of daily trials I had to go through during this period as the said person is no more.

  However, at a particular point in time, I thought I could not continue here any longer and sought a transfer in my posting. And the transfer came in the form of being posted as Under Secretary in the Ministry of Home Affairs. I thought it was a welcome relief. How was I to know that the future was to hold many more tougher challenges, both professional and personal, particularly in my tenure in the Ministry of Home Affairs? Incidentally, my father had, not long before, retired as Deputy Secretary from the Ministry of Home Affairs. At the time of my MHA posting, he had—call it premonition or foresight—told me that this appointment would be a challenging phase of my work life and I would come out clean and famous.

  I began my tenure in MHA by reporting to the Director (Administration) who was a typical bureaucrat who never made anyone feel welcome. Later I learnt that in spite of being empanelled as Joint Secretary, for quite a few years, he had not been picked up as one and this was the reason for his unwelcome behaviour. Having not known the background, I answered his cryptic welcome question in an even more cryptic response. This provoked him. He swore to me that he would post me in a place where no previous incumbent in the last few years had lasted for more than six-to-nine months. Surely, I needed to look forward to this challenging posting. I left my contact number with him, saying, whenever the placement was finalised, he could inform me and I would come and take charge immediately.

  Time between postings are periods when people generally attend to their long-pending personal errands, socialise with long lost friends, and even catch up on sleep. I preferred to catch up on sleep and spent time with my ageing parents.

  During one of those slumbers, the telephone rang and when I answered, it was the MHA asking me to take over as Under Secretary, Internal Security Division.

  I did not have the profile for the job. I reported to the concerned Joint Secretary, who later I came to respect for his erudition, commitment, comprehension and competence. The one virtue that he needed really was the ability to laugh. Notwithstanding this vice, anyone who spent time with him realised that he was not just an able officer; he was an excellent human being. In his own stone-faced style, after assessing me, he started explaining the rules of the game as well as gave me an overview of the work of the Division. At that point, I understood that this gentleman, L C Goyal, had an eye for detail and also demanded full commitment. His demeanour compelled me to assure him of my full commitment at once.

  When I took charge of the post, there was one gentleman who had steadfastly lobbied for his way out, who hugged me. Being a senior colleague, I also displayed a sense of warmth towards him. I knew that he had bluffed his way out of the Division by citing illness of his parents and others. So keen was he to be relieved that even the customary briefing was not offered by this gentleman.

  I was to share a room with another friend who was a qualified engineer and was dealing with Border Management Projects of the MHA. This is now known as one of the toughest jobs in the country.

  Questions in Parliament, IISc blast

  After settling the logistical details, when I began to delve into the core functioning of my department, I found that there were questions, motions, calling-attention notices of both Houses of Parliament, of which there was no count, waiting for attention and it was one of my duties to provide the answers and documentation.

  Immediate action was warranted in case of many decisions taken in meetings regarding many issues that were pending for a long time. Some work pertaining to the progress of the investigation in the Indian Institute of Science bomb blast was also pending. I remember this distinctly because this was the first case I dealt with in the MHA. I knew that long hours of work lay ahead of me.

  I had to immediately prepare for disposing of the several assurances that had been made in Parliament in response to various questions/calling attention motions where any Member has the right to call the attention of the government.

  Then there were the specia
l mentions which in Lok Sabha is known as Rule 377 cases, in which a Member of any House flags any particular issue which requires the immediate attention of the government. On behalf of the answering authority, the MHA, I had to collate the data in respect of status of the investigation in question. At the very outset, I had to collect information to frame replies to several questions in Parliament as the Budget Session of the year 2006 was on at that time.

  Parliamentary questions are of primarily two categories. The simpler one is the unstarred question in which written replies are tendered. The framing of replies is based on information available or collected from various security and other agencies. With due respect to the dignity of the Parliament, bureaucrats refer to this job as jawab phenkna (throw the reply).

  The starred questions are the ones in which oral replies are tendered by the answering Minister or his deputy. Such a question entitles the questioning Member to ask for two supplementary questions on the subject matter of the question and any other Member of the House can also ask one supplementary question, giving prior notice.

  The preparation for not only framing of replies but also anticipating the supplementary questions and their commensurate replies is a very elaborate rigmarole of collecting of information of all possible related areas. Then a separate note for the supplementary is drafted to assist the Minister, which culminates in the briefing session for the Minister and his ministerial colleagues by the concerned bureaucrats. The Internal Security Division always received notices for Questions in dozens and not in ones or twos, on every Question Day.

  What is the need for compensation?

  More importantly, my purpose of recalling this is to capture the mindset of the then Ministers towards our jawans protecting the borders.

  Normally, the briefing session is attended by Deputy Secretaries/ Directors and personnel of higher ranking. Once, as my Director was not available, I had to stand in for him in one such session. Apart from questions relating to counter-terrorism, there was another one relating to police welfare measures.