Why dont I prefer Modi? (Part 2 : Riots and corruption)

This is the second part of this series. If you think Modi’s handling of economy is so great as to compensate for all his other shortcomings listed below, then you are strongly advised to first read first part of the series!

Riots and false encounters:

  • Watch how many of Modi’s close aides (including his defense lawyers!) were caught in a sting boasting of Modi’s role in the riots:

In case you are still doubting, note that CBI forensics report also authenticated the tapes and the people appearing in it. The video and the report have been accepted by courts.

  • Modi admitted destroying crucial riots evidence of police vehicle logs and distress call records, citing bland procedures [read]. If he is really innocent, he would have preserved them as proof, wouldn’t he?


  • An ex home minister of Guj, Haren Pandya, was assassinated just as he was starting to speak out about Modi’s role in calling a cabinet meeting on eve of the riots and asking his ministers and police to give rioters a free hand. [read]


  •  The State Intelligence chief during riot time, Sreekumar DGP, has deposed before the Nanavati commission saying the same on Modi – that, the orders to go free on rioters came from political bosses (read his account here).


  • Modi uses a ‘carrot and stick’ policy for his senior police officers. After the above Intelligence chief Sreekumar’s deposition before the riots commission, he was hounded by Modi’s govt and even denied his due (it was again the courts that came to his rescue). On the other hand, other IPS officers like K.D.Patadia (who has been listed as a potential witness in the ongoing CBI investigation against Amit Shah mentioned below) has been promptly inducted into Modi’s party, as soon as they retired [read]!


  • Modi’s former home minister, Amit Shah, has a court order against him from entering Gujarat for fear of influencing police and tampering with evidence! He was offered a temporary reprieve by the courts to campaign during 2012 gujarat assembly elections. But then, Modi has even given him a ticket to contest that election!


  • Modi made Maya Kodnani the women & child development minister after she rioted and burnt many alive, including several women and children, and before the courts sentenced her for 28yrs. Was Modi trying to reward her?

One more rumor being planted by the Modi machinery is that he has been cleared of riots charges by the courts. Truth is, only a Metropolitan Court has heard the case so far and Both High Court and the Supreme Court has not yet started to even go through the SIT report and hear its arguments. On the other hand, Amicus Curiae (who is appointed by SC to give a neutral opinion on SIT report) has said that SIT is wrong to give a clean chit to Modi. The SC has also twice asked SIT to give its report to the IPS officers who could then prepare their arguments against SIT’s clean chit. Thus, the case is far from settled, unlike what the Modi brigade has been trumpeting. 


Corruption and murder of activists:

    • Modi stalled appointment of lokayukta for 9 yrs and even tried changing its appointment rules to put a man of his own choice, until HC strongly came against him; In the end, the HC chief justice had to appoint the lokayukta in concurrence with the state governor (as per guj lokayukta act which includes HC chief justice, CM and governor as selection members) [read]. In its observation on Modi, the Gujarat High Court said:

For preserving our democracy from being beleaguered and to prevent tyranny, it became absolutely essential for the governor to exercise discretionary power under Article 163 of the Constitution and to appoint Justice (retired) R A Mehta as Lokayukta, without or contrary to the aid and advice of the council of ministers headed by the chief minister, as their action and conduct were perilous to our democracy and rule of law. The CM acted under a false impression that he could turn down the superiority and primacy of Chief Justice’s opinion which was binding. The spiteful and challenging action demonstrates the false sense of invincibility

  • Modi’s current Water Resources minister, Babulal Bokhiria, has been continuing in his ministry till today even after he has been convicted, in June 2013, to a 3 year jail term for a mining scam from 2006.


  • Modi’s most powerful minister, Anandiben Patel, who will most likely take over as Gujarat CM if Modi moves to Delhi, has been slammed by the Supreme Court for favoring crony-corporations by illegally selling government lands.


  • Modi’s nexus with Adani group in Gujarat has been documented and detailed in a recent Forbes article, while every Indian media has been silent on this. Modi’s stubborn silence on the Reliance-Congress gas pricing scam is also well known.


  • Modi offered a 10% ($ 2 Billion) worth gas exploration stake in Gujarat State Petroleum Corporation (GSPC) to a shell company GeoGlobal registered in a Caribbean island with a total capital of mere 64$, just one person in it and no exploration experience! Not only that, GSPC even agreed to pay GeoGlobal’s 10% share in the common exploration costs. In the end, all that Geo had to do was take home profits and $ 2 Billion worth gas fields!


  • Modi twice denied sanction to prosecute his cabinet minister, Purshotam Solanki, in a 400cr fisheries scam. Once again the HC had to intervene and give permission. His other cabinet minister, Anandiben, is accused of allowing a private company Indigold to make windfall gains by selling cheap govt lands, even when her own officers were against it. Modi still has not sanctioned prosecution. Kejriwal had also flagged these issues on his visit to Gujarat earlier. An RTI query revealed corruption in NREGA scheme in Gujarat with one BJP MLA, Vijay Patel, having multiple NREGA accounts in his name and siphoning off money.


  • Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) has indicted Modi’s government for causing huge losses to the public exchequer by favoring large business houses.


  • In the last couple of years, RTI activists Amit Jethva, Nadim Saiyyad, Vikram Dodia, Jabbardan Gadhvi, Jayesh Barad and Yogesh Sendhva were killed or committed suicide in Modi’s gujarat for fighting against corruption and land grabbing. Gujarat has one of the highest number of murders of RTI activists. Gujarat BJP MP, Dinu Solanki, has been charge sheeted for the murder of Amit Jethva who was exposing illegal mining in Gir sanctuary.


  • Modi’s brilliant solution to black money was to ask all candidates to *self-declare* that they dont have black accounts (see modi’s google hangout video!)


Shortlink to this page: http://wp.me/p2PlLD-1X


About Gu'an

Blog: iamamangoman DOT wordpress DOT com
Gallery | This entry was posted in Corruption, Modi and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

15 Responses to Why dont I prefer Modi? (Part 2 : Riots and corruption)

  1. Pingback: Why dont I prefer Modi? (Part 1 : Development)

  2. Arihant Zenab says:

    Dude.. I was just about the report fully but I stopped at the point where u mentioned that Amicus Curiae said something .. U know why I stopped… becoz I realized that ur blog and ur views are prejudiced.. Amicus Curiae said this on 7th May,Agreed..!! But on 10 th May,3 days after,SC quashed the Amicus Curiae’s report..!! Y didnt u mention it.. did u forget..?? or by the depth of ur research I am damn sure u knew about this fact..

    Another thing.. the Amicus Curiae was (Pardon me if I get the name wrong) some Raju,he was fighting the case of Ajmal Kasab and didnt even take fees for taking his case.. So if a man who has sided with Kasab is speaking against XYZ person,then I will actually trust that XYZ person more..

  3. Borat says:

    Dont buy your first point about Modi destroying evidence. Sanjiv Bhatt is a known Congress supporter. There are vested interests at play here. It would be gullible to make any judgment about destruction of evidence.

    The second point is slightly more meatier. There is circumstantial evidence at play here. But it remains within the speculative realm. It is difficult to derive conclusions here but the circumstantial evidence cannot be ignored and has to be noted.

    The third point basically tells me you suffer from a huge dose of confirmation bias. You have included the point of a known Modi baiter who has deposed in front of the Commission but you conveniently forgot to objectively analyse the depositions of other people who were in favour of the establishment’s method of handling things. After having read the whole argument I have not read any part where he mentioned what you have concluded. Though I may admit, I may have missed out due to the length of the article. Though it is evident that Sreekumar is totally against Modi, his personal allegations were in my opinion wild and inconclusive. Ofcourse, you are seeing things from different lenses and allegations which seem wild to me will seem perfectly legitimate in your eyes. But I speak from the vantage point of a neutral third party observer (Thats my unverifiable claim. But my intention is to truly see things objectively).

    The fourth point- There is no denying that Sreekumar was hounded. But this does answer questions regarding the complicity of Modi in the riots. It reflects negatively on the Govt for hounding your political rivals nevertheless it does not prove Sreekumar’s allegations of Govt mismanagment of riots

    The fifth point is regarding the case of Amit Shah. A person who is distinct from Modi. You cannot connect that Manmohan Singh is corrupt as there is allegations of corruption against Suresh Kalmadi. (Though you may be justified in saying Manmohan Singh may be corrupt due to allegations in Coal Scam since he signed the allocation of arbitrary coal blocks). Even if you prove Amit Shah was close to Modi it does not prove Modi’s complicity. If a brother of mine turns out to be a criminal it does not prove my complicity in his crimes just because we were close. I am wondering why you did not mention Zadaphia’s name. Is it because he was thrown out of the party? That may reflect your selective bias.

    Your Sixth point again enters the realm of speculation. In India, a lot of legislators are in power even when there are court cases against them. They are removed from power only in case of conviction. It is best to refrain from passing a judgment

    Seventh point is basically saying that SIT report may be inconclusive and clean chit has to be questioned. The AC feels that Modi was inciting violence in his speech and his speech was indeed problematic along with a few other concerns.I have not heard the speech Modi made after the riots so cannot comment on the AC’s analysis. He also questions the debunking of Sanjeev Bhatt’s testomony. In my humble opinion, there are too many gaps in Bhatt’s testimony and SIT was right in not accepting Bhatt’s testimony.

    My main intention to read this analysis was to gauge whether Modi was complicit in the riots. Thus , I am giving other sections of the analysis a pass. Unfortunately, my understanding of the case has not improved after reading the analysis. I am still ambivalent. I plead my ignorance on Modi’s role in the riots. He may or may not have been guilty. I say that I do not know not because of lack of knowledge or information about the case but inspite of it. But it is very apparent that the author of this post’s hatred against Modi is quite deep-rooted which in-turn makes him vulnerable to bouts of confirmation and selective bias.

    Again, I submit that I am neither a Modi supporter nor an opponent of his policies.

    • Gu'an says:

      I am not quite convinced that you are absolutely unbiased in your opinion for/against Modi. I am not suggesting that you are deceiving me – it could very well be an unconscious bias. I too believe I am unbiased in my opinion – after all, what do I have against Modi when he has done nothing against me (and from a time when there was no kejriwal too). I will tell you why I think that way about you:

      (1) While you are careful not to form any opinion of Modi inspite of prima facie evidences (which convinces even a neutral Amicus Curiae), you dont seem to follow the same objectivity for Sanjiv Bhatt who had deposed against Modi, when you said he is “known congress supporter”. While it is true that congress has been riding on his deposition (for obvious political mileage), there is absolutely no evidence to suggest the reverse causality that Sanjiv Bhatt is working at congress’ behest!

      (2) Irrespective of whether it is Sanjiv Bhatt or anyone else who filed that RTI, Modi’s govt has accepted that it destroyed police call and vehicle records, at a time when there was maximum heat on Modi to prove his innocence, which he could have, using those evidences in court hearings that started later. But he destroyed them. The fact that you choose to simply brush this aside is suspicious.

      (3) As for DGP Sreekumar’s statements, I dont see how they are personal allegations (they are allegations against the govt) and why they should be brushed aside. SIT even acknowledged the authenticity of an audio recording by Sreekumar where he was approached by home secretary and special prosecutor (among others) to coach him to lie to the commission (see the Tehelka link I posted in another comment above. I am not a big fan of Tehelka either since it is openly pro-congress and is even against Kejriwal, but facts are facts whereever it comes from).

      (4) The fact that Sreekumar was hounded should not be seen in isolation but is to be seen in the backdrop of him being approached by home secy etc to corroborate Modi’s version and eventual deposition against Modi etc.

      (5) If that (ie. not to form judgements of corruption even if there is prima facie evidence, until courts convict) is the procedure to be followed, would you also say that congress is clean as a white swan, since there has been no conviction in any of the scams UPA? If not, why this double standard for Modi?

      (6) No, the reason for AC’s opinion to chargesheet Modi goes much beyond just his speech. You should again read the Tehelka link I referred to above. I dont see any gap in Bhatt’s testimony, and there are many objections other than Bhatt’s.

      It is for these reasons that it is hard for me to believe that you have been absolutely neutral. Also, note once again that I have absolutely no pre-enmity with Modi – he is just another politician (and I had formed my opinion much earlier than I knew kejriwal and I didnt vote for congress either). Same with Bhatt or Sreekumar (no news have come out that they had any axe to grind with Modi from before riots or even after riots when it was clear that Modi’s govt is here to stay in Guj). This is the whole principle of witness and evidence – when there is no motive, no one will lie and take so much pain and risk to go against their entire department, govt and Modi, and neither are these senior officers crazy to do such a thing.

      • Nasir says:

        Nice reply….!

      • Amit Goyal says:

        Dear Mango Man, your name is nice but intentions remain as coloured as expected from Any other AAP member. You talk about false encounters in Gujarat. That is good no doubt but would had been transperent had you spoken about other states as well. May be you are so very focussed on Modi that the other states must have escaped your mention, Let me do that for you. 1. According to the National Human Rights Commission of India, there were 440 cases of alleged fake encounters in the country during 2002-2007. Most of these happened in the states of Uttar Pradesh (231), Rajasthan (33), Maharashtra (31), Delhi (26), Andhra Pradesh (22) and Uttaranchal (19).
        From 2009-10 to February 2013, NHRC recorded 555 cases of alleged fake encounters. The states with high number of cases were Uttar Pradesh (138), Manipur (62), Assam (52), West Bengal (35) and Jharkhand (30).

        As you can see Gujarat stands no where when it comes to False encounters but the coloured & biased Mango man along with their Massiah Arvind Kejriwal fails to bring out the fact. what they bring out is one riot as always.

        2. CAG indiction: let us talk about CAG Indiction of UPA & please let me know of one area where CAG has not indicted UPA, Be it defence preparedness, education, Manerga, Corruption but CAG indicts Modi government once and it becomes a crime and a reason to hate Modi.

        3.R Sreekumar: so you find who ever this gentleman is an honourable person maybe But seeing his role in the ISRO spy case in Kerala maybe I do not share the same opinion. Maybe the SC also except the respected Congress Government.

        4 Tainted Ministers: I am still on a fact finding regarding the tainted ministers as mentioned by you but at the same time I came across a Name ” Binayak Sen “, In fact a video I watched recently had one of your most famous faces Ashutosh calling him Anti Indian. Is this person actually a memebr of your party? Is he in some sort of central committee. Is it true that leave alone conviction he has been sentenced to life imprisonment that too for Anti India Activities? Is this your great idea to remove corruption from India, remove the state itself.

        Wait for more will be coming back to show your real face to every one.

      • Gu'an says:

        Of course, it is well known that all those other parties ruling other states (and center) are corrupt too. And most of those parties have allied with BJP and Congress in past and will ally in future too. Regarding fake encounters and murders of RTI activists, Gujarat’s per-capita count is as much as (if not more) in those other states.

        Regarding Binayak Sen, Soni Sori, Sreekumar etc etc: I leave it to others to do their own research and conclude their guilt/innocence.

  4. Jagadish says:

    Great job……Please do the same on YS Jagan as well.
    Modi and Jagan are the biggest and maybe hand in glove criminals today in India

  5. Jagadish says:

    And sadly both are winning elections….

  6. Raj says:

    It is almost difficult to argue with Modi fans.

  7. KUMAR says:

    Great. You need to spread these columns more, may be through Facebook/Twittter if not doing already?

  8. Amit Goyal says:

    Dear Mango man, Hope you are doing fine, I am back with more. and the further I dig further I uncover the hidden gems that you and your messiah misrepresent.

    You have mentioned GeoGlobal somewhere and you have mentioned Modi gave it 10% stake while the fact is Modi Government has written to cancel their stakes that too in 2010 already. The factual picture is GeoGlobal Resources Inc. is an exploration-stage company. The Company is engaged, through the Company’s subsidiaries, in the exploration for and development of oil and natural gas reserves. As of December 31, 2011, the Company’s activities were being undertaken in four geological basins located offshore and onshore in India, one geological basin located offshore in Israel and one geological basin located onshore in Colombia. GeoGlobal Resources (Barbados) Inc. and GeoGlobal Resources (India) Inc. are the Company’s wholly owned subsidiaries. Apart from GSPC the company is also a partner with OIL (oil India Ltd) in the Krishna Godavari Basin while it is also active in the Bikaner- Nagaur basin as well as in cambay ref: http://in.reuters.com/finance/stocks/companyProfile?symbol=GGLR.PK. Further as per http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2012-12-06/news/35647542_1_gspc-kg-basin-block-geoglobal-resources the GSPC submitted a bid for the exploration block in the KG Basin jointly with GeoGlobal Resources and Jubilant Group. in 2003. The private firms held 10% each while GSPC took 80%. This shows that the company was allotted exploration rights by the central government and not Modi as you falsely portray.

    I believe this is proof enough of your biased Blog, you are certainly a mango man sir but evry coloured that is for sure

    • Gu'an says:

      It is a fact that when Gujarat govt’s GSPC gave that ten thousand crores stake to Geoglobal in 2003, it was worth merely sixty-four dolars (ie. less than five thousand rupees). Of course it has diversified in 2011 from all those ill-gotten benefits from 2003.

      It is a fact that Geoglobal did not even put in its share of money for exploration, and it was Gujarat govt that footed that share of Geoglobal.

      It was totally risk-free investment for Geoglobal… a clear cut case of cronyism.

      And of course central congress govt was more than willing to collude with Modi govt because the other crony who was similarly benefited by Gujarat govt’s GSPC was the similarly inexperienced Jubiliant Enpro, owned by Congress politician and industrialist Shobna Bhartia.

  9. Manikantan says:

    for the first time I am seeing Modi supporters being disciplined in their language without any foul language, a hall mark of most of them. Moreover their understanding about the economy, humanity and Indianness is utterly aweful. There is a selective ignorance from them, hence not been able to see facts.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s