by RVS Mani
It would be best that a comparison of the inventory of intercepts used in the Ajmal Kasab trial and that shared with the Pakistani authorities be made in order to understand what difference the intercept evidence can make to such bilateral processes. I am fully aware that immediately, Pakistan will try to create a fuss and try to use such evidence as an alibi. But the nation should know. Posterity should know, how and where MHA stood in such matters in 2010. It was not the institution, the Ministry that called the shots, it was the Minister, the individual who did.
More importantly, the incumbent who replaced the persistent Joint Secretary was Dharmendra Sharma, the one who had been asked to proceed on leave by the Home Secretary in February for delaying procurement and adversely affecting the efficiency of the Central paramilitary forces. Was this again by design? We do not know.
Madhury Gupta and friends
The only thing that came to light in 2010 was that there were a few CBI raids in the MHA on account of the Prevention of Corruption Act. This was very unusual. Inducement-related corruption was never heard of in MHA. There might have been cases of nepotism, recommendations for postings, the usual jugaad, the gift seeking like whiskeys or requests for vehicles with Central paramilitary forces. These specific incidents were never actually reported. These were all hearsay. But two cases came to light in 2010.
According to a CBI statement in April, a senior Indian Railway Service Officer attached to the Ministry of Home Affairs, Radhey Shyam Sharma was accused of taking a bribe of Rs 10 lakh. This Sharma, in charge of procurements, was also accused of procuring bulletproof jackets illegally.
The charges against R S Sharma were brought immediately after Madhuri Gupta, incumbent Second Secretary in the High Commission of India, Islamabad was summoned to Delhi in April 2010 and arrested from the Delhi Airport. She was charged with leaking classified information to Pakistan’s ISI.
Was it a mere coincidence? It may appear to be so to the naked eye. Sharma was handling procurements for Central paramilitary forces and the deployment in different sensitive locations can be given away by consignee location of the order. Gupta was leaking sensitive information. What more sensitive information is valuable to Pakistan ISI than locations of Indian paramilitary forces, their relative strengths in terms of equipment, instruments, and other inventory?
Obviously it was an intelligence-driven operation and the country should be grateful to our agencies. One of the officers of the busting team, IB Special Director Rajinder Kumar, was accused of Human Rights violations in the Ishrat Jahan Case and his retirement benefits were denied. Not the best way to decorate an illustrious officer.
Television clips of December 2010 will tell my readers that in December 2010, another MHA official, Pradeep Singh, dealing with giving critical security clearances to foreign investments, working in the MHA’s Foreigners Division, was accused by the CBI of corruption. At the same time, Dr Ravinder Singh, who as Director IS had been handling many a sensitive document and subjects (including the Blackberry dispute in which Home Ministry had asked the Canadian company RIM, the maker of Blackberry phone, to give the government access to their secret codes for security reasons) was also raided. Both these officials had been under the supervision of Joint Secretary Dharmendra Sharma in Police Modernization Division and who had oversight of the procurement work.
Was the security clearances being issued without due diligence? Were the security of several establishments and infrastructure projects being built by private players being compromised? Was the proposals considered for Foreign Investments in sectors in which security clearances are used as vital input by the Board being diluted? Or were people like Rajinder Kumar, Pradeep Singh and Ravinder Singh the scapegoats while the big fish played free? We do not know.
Surgical Strikes
While discussing security of vital installations, I would also like to bring out a very interesting fact. In September 2016, there were surgical strikes which were a calibrated initiative to arrest the misdeeds of Pakistan and other ISI-sponsored groups operating from PoK. In the aftermath of these surgical strikes, there were statements issued by several political entities about how there were surgical strikes even during 2006-2010 etc.
Before every such strike is planned, there is a group of top officials of security establishments who assess the possible fallouts of such strikes. Then there are prescribed procedure stipulated for securing the most important assets of the nation. These are contained in the form of a manual. This contains several calibrations commensurate with the index and degree of offensive proposed. The order comes from the top security establishment. There is clear demarcation of responsibility between the two leading Ministries, Home and Defence. These top security orders are put in place before commencement of the process of any ‘surgical strikes’. I never received any orders to implement any of the safeguards during 2006-2010 in the MHA.
Was the government of the day being reckless in not invoking this procedure before initiating the surgical strikes, in case they did carry out such a strike as claimed? Was the government of the day throwing caution to winds? Were they not exposing our assets? This is on the assumption that the claim of surgical strikes is true. Or else, the claim is untrue.
Exiled from Internal Security
Joint Secretary Diptivilasa, leader of a very cohesive group, had been replaced. The new incumbent, Dharmendra Sharma, was an erudite person. He had this tendency to keep polishing the drafts. It was expected to be in the best of English language, no matter how inordinately delayed the document got. One day, I had the temerity to remark, ‘Sirji, angrezi polish hote hote, terrorist goli maar jayega’. He did not take kindly to this smartcrack. Anyways, a controversy surrounding me was brewing.
The administration Division of MHA manages the deployment of resources—human resources, facilities, utilities, supply of consumables etc. I had space constraints. I needed separate steel almirahs for ensuring the safe custody of Fake Currency Notes seized by our security forces. I had requested for the same. The practice was, I used to go to Mumbai to hand them over to the Reserve Bank of India for getting them to do the examination. Till that time, the notes were my responsibility.
I had asked the Administration Division for providing me an almirah. They had a Director who had this habit of crying shortage of resources. He was also close to the Additional Secretary (BM), who had caused the extension of stay of the Indian delegation in Pakistan during 26/11. Since operational requirement was on the agenda in one meeting, the Home Secretary desired to know whether I had any constraints, I conveyed my requirement to him. This set off a level of hostility from these Administration personnel.
Outside my chamber, apart from my staff, the Police Training Section was also occupying space. There was a lady officer in charge. One fine morning, I was asked to give my handwriting specimen for examination before the Joint Secretary (Administration). Later I came to know that the lady officer occupying the space outside my room had made a gender harassment complaint against me. The allegations were that a nasty, hand written note was found along with a packet of condoms in her table drawers. After that an inquiry was initiated as per the Vishaka guidelines and nothing was found. It was obviously a frame up. I do not know if it was due to personal malice or it was a larger design.
I was transferred from the IS Division in June 2010. It is a matter of public record that the existence of Hindu Terrorism was first recorded by Joint Secretary Dharmendra Sharma in a file, without attendant and corresponding inputs from any agency for the first time in July 2010. Hence my transfer from the IS Division in June appears to be a design to me.
The Kashmir problem
Later, I was posted in the Kashmir Division of the MHA. Here my tenure was very short. So I do not vividly remember details. The only achievement was that when a group of eminent citizens led by the illustrious journalist Dilip Padgaonkar and Radha Kumar, an academician and others, decided to try for peace in Kashmir, I wrote a paper—relying upon 1953, 1975,
1984 and other series of agreements—that Kashmir had no problem that requires resolution.
‘Kashmir trouble’ is basically a commercial venture. When the Prime Minister’s Rs 5,500 crore package of 2006, or a subsequent Rs 26,000 crore package (which ultimately benefits the contractors and separatist) has been expended, new ventures like stone-pelting start. I had forecast this June 2010 disturbance in the last week of May itself.
In fact, in May 2010, many of my ex-colleagues were surprised that I could forecast a disturbance with very little exposure to Kashmir affairs.
Vilfredo Pareto, an Italian Sociologist, had propounded a theory. According to him, the governing elites come to political power due to existence of some malfunction in society and with a promise of solution to this malfunction. However, after coming to power, they ensure that this malfunction continues and perpetrates so that their continuation in power on this pretext is ensured.
The issue of Kashmir and its illusory problem, and nonresolution of the problem if it exists, and non-removing the veil of illusion if it doesn’t exist, is an apt validation of this theory.
My paper set the cat amongst the pigeons.
As expected, it was trashed and destroyed. Thereafter, I felt unwanted in MHA. There was this fear also that I could be framed any time after one gender harassment case, which a staffer from Administration known to me from Udyog Bhavan days, leaked. He said that it was a frame up. After that I decided to leave Delhi for a while. I took up a new posting in Mumbai in the Central Board of Film Certification.
However, I was kept up to date about the happenings in the MHA through my former colleagues. I learnt that after the departure of Joint Secretary Diptivilasa and myself from the IS Division, the Director also proceeded on long leave on the pretext that his children had examinations. Thus, for those who wanted us out, effectively, the Internal Security Division’s best team had been neutralised. Of course, the other Director, Dr Singh who was in the Division, had already attained notoriety in the software/hardware case.
Their victories
After suspension of Home Secretary Level Talks in the aftermath of 26.11.2008, the next edition of the talks was hosted by India in New Delhi in March end 2011. I have no information on what led to this resumption of talks. The very fact that the HSLTs were resumed meant, the opposite party (or collaborative party) emerged the winner.
It is important to mention that during these talks, dossiers were exchanged between the delegations on fugitives. In 2006, 2007 and 2008, MHA IS Division was assigned the task of coordinating the dossier preparation. We used to interact closely with agencies, do cross verification and then one of the agencies was tasked with the final printing of the dossier. The Home Secretary himself chaired the meetings in the iteration process. Hence the information contained in the dossier was accurate to the sigma level. We knew there was zero margin of error.
But the new team had assigned the work to their new agency, that is the NIA, which was the then Home Minister’s favourite. I do not know what was the level of quality control. I do not know whether they really coordinated with other agencies. They took their orders from P Chidambaram. During the initial stages, the personnel of the Agency were well aware of this. They behaved vis-a-vis the other agencies as if they were one notch above. Hence, it appears they did not take the other agencies on board. This was a recipe for disaster. It happened.
Two of the names included in the Indian dossier given to the Pakistan visitors in 2011 were that of Wazhul Kamar Khan and one more. These two were indicated as ‘fugitives from Indian law living in Pakistan’. They were found lodged in Indian jails! NIA perhaps should have been more diligent. Or were they under orders to commit this error? We do not know. But the end result was that credibility of all the dossiers which India had painstakingly prepared with the agencies crashed. Pakistan went home laughing. The Home Minister found two subinspectors responsible and suspended them. Later, he admitted to the media his own responsibility.
A day after it emerged that one of the 50 fugitives named in the list given by India to Pakistan in March was living in Thane, Union Home Minister P Chidambaram took ‘responsibility’ for the ‘mistake’.
Wazhul Kamar Khan alias Murtuza Choudhary, who was arrested last year for his alleged role in the 2003 Mulund blasts, got on to the list as a result of a ‘genuine error’ by Mumbai Police and ‘oversight’ by the Intelligence Bureau, Chidambaram told reporters today.
The list of fugitives from Indian law hiding out in Pakistan was part of the dossier handed over by Union Home Secretary G K Pillai to his counterpart Qamar Zaman Choudhary on March 28, 2011.
Chidambaram said that Mumbai Police arrested Khan on May 21, 2010, but did not inform CBI or request the withdrawal of the Red Corner Notice (RCN) against him. CBI made inquiries with Mumbai Police about Khan on January 27 this year, he said, adding that Mumbai Police wrote to the government yesterday, requesting cancellation of the RCN.
‘We take responsibility. It is a mistake. How this mistake has happened has been explained subsequently. CBI through Interpol will notify the arrest of Khan’, Chidambaram said. He also said that Khan’s name had already been removed from the list of wanted, and asserted that what had happened was not a ‘monumental mistake’ of ‘calamitous consequence’. The minister revealed that Mumbai Police had in January this year conveyed to the Intelligence Bureau (IB) office in Mumbai that Khan had been arrested.
‘This information, unfortunately, was not reflected in the list of fugitives maintained by the authorities and was overlooked while a list was prepared in March 2011’, he said. It was clear that the failure on the part of Mumbai Police to formally communicate the fact of the arrest of Khan to the CBI had resulted in the name being retained by CBI, Chidambaram said. ‘It is possible that the said failure was the result of a genuine oversight by the Mumbai Police. At the same time there was also a lapse on the part of IB in not reflecting the information received by it while preparing the list in March 2011.’
(Source Express News Service May 2011)
In one stroke the credibility of all the dossiers painstakingly prepared by India, year after year, for different bilateral mechanisms had been destroyed.
It is not the credibility of our documents before international media and agencies alone. Chidambaram had also betrayed the falsity of his responses that had been tabled in both Houses of Parliament in question after question on the steps taken to combat terror. Statements like these sounded so hollow:
Our security concerns are conveyed in various bilateral mechanisms established for this purpose.
The government pursues a multi-dimensional approach to deal with terrorists activities and extends supports to the States in neutralizing such terrorist activities. The Government has taken measures which include strengthening of border management to check infiltration, galvanizing the intelligence machinery, ensuring improved technology, weaponry and equipment, of security forces both at the Centre and the States, by well coordinated intelligence based operations. Besides, steps have also been taken to achieve bilateral and multilateral cooperation to deal with the menace of terrorism, given its global dimensions.
Life after MHA
MY TENURE IN the Central Board of Film Certification was generally routine and uneventful. I had to attend meetings in the Ministry of I&B almost every weekend. The area of operation was new and interesting. The organisation had lots of problems with lack of staff, unmotivated human resources, corruption and with nine field offices for oversight. Soon after my joining, another Chief Executive Officer also took over. We set about cleaning of the organisation. This Chief Executive Officer was a lady Customs and Excise Service officer. There was a general level of cordiality between us. She was very polite and empathetic in her dispensation with staff. I do believe that while dealing with sub-optimally productive staff, one has to wield the stick. Motivation gaya tel lene. But this lady was too accommodative.
In the Ministry there was Joint Secretary D P Reddy,
who expected too much. His common refrain was: arre tum home ministry mein itna kuch kiya, yahan kya problem hai? He acted tough with me. But I always knew, underneath he was a lovely officer. I continued for nearly one-and-a-half years in the I&B Ministry. To mitigate corruption, I worked with NIC personnel and introduced online application for film certification which was inaugurated by the Chief Minister of Maharashtra and the then Chairperson CBFC, Leela Samson, the dancer in Mumbai in June 2011. I knew within a year, I had made a mark. But I could never settle down to life in Mumbai. My wife was still in Delhi. My son had completed his Engineering course and had joined MBA in Delhi. So I longed to be in Delhi. Initially, I politely requested for a change. It was curtly turned down. After a few tantrums and the threat of VRS, I was finally returned to Delhi.
It was December 2011. I was placed in the Ministry of Urban Development, in the Urban Transport Division. This Division also dealt with the finalisation of specification for buses procured under the JNNURM. In the meanwhile, my son who was a mechanical engineer, started working on projects with major bus manufacturers. I wanted to avoid conflict of interest. I informed my office, who promptly posted me as a Deputy Land and Development Officer.
I knew it was a challenging posting. Initially, I was given ‘enforcement’, a department which does the job of mapping encroachment on government lands and gets them cleared. At the outset, there was no proper record of encroachments. I got them all computerised and introduced a database. Surprisingly, the data mapped by this department is up to 9th July 2012 when I was assigned other responsibilities.
In July 2012 there was a Presidential election. The sitting Finance Minister, Pranab Mukherjee, had become the President of India. Hence there was general inquisitiveness as to who would be the next Finance Minister. Surprisingly, that very day, the then government appointed the sitting Home Minister, P Chidambaram, as the Finance Minister.