Shekhar Gupta omits role of Hindutva forces in Bombay violence while criticising Sanju
His hypocrisy has not just
crept into the Indian political marketplace, but has been legitimised by
policy makers and journalists.
Many things went seriously wrong with India’s polity and governance during that dark winter of December 1992-January 1993, and the March 12 serial blasts, which killed close to 250 people, were the final diabolical culmination.
Many things went seriously wrong with India’s polity and governance during that dark winter of December 1992-January 1993, and the March 12 serial blasts, which killed close to 250 people, were the final diabolical culmination.
Evil, sinister and diabolical are words that have come to represent the ISI. Words easily used even by Shekhar Gupta in his diatribe against the latest Sanju biopic
that has, like many before it, cherry-picked one part of a gory
sequence of events. Words that conjure outrage and betrayal with
reference to 12 March 1993.
In contrast, the few and casual sounding
phrases like ‘riots’ and ‘timeline’ confine, the equally if not more
sinister and systemic, whipping up of neighbourhood terror backed by
police collusion (can we dare term this ‘khaki’ terror?) to the dustbins
of amnesiac history.
In his latest avatar as editor of
ThePrint, Gupta upholds this one-sided, myopic outrage against bomb
terror while conveniently (for the establishment) turning his eye away
from India’s dark underbelly. This accepted hypocrisy has not just crept
into the Indian political marketplace but has been legitimised, time
and again, by policy makers, journalists and the like. So, while the
serial blasts of 12 March, with the Dawood-Tiger Memon plot and the
AK-47s, grenades and RDX, conjure up horror and anger in the righteous
Gupta, the carefully crafted bloodthirst of the Bombay mob –incited and
led allegedly by Shiv Sena (SS) chief Bal Thackeray’s rantings in Saamna – that
reportedly took over 1,100 lives and tore apart the fabric of India’s
urbs prima is just not accepted as a definition of terror.
Which is why the Justice B.N. Srikrishna
report on those dark days is, in today’s India, considered passé, even
by online news portals.
Because, the report meticulously documents
the gory build-up to India’s first concentrated betrayal of itself as a
nation, when in full public view, with 3,000 paramilitary forces
watching (and yes, Sharad Pawar, then India’s defence minister is known
to have the videos to prove it!), a place of religious worship was
demolished, breaking Indian law, violating the Constitution and
legitimising the criminals (who thereafter rose to become deputy prime
minister, home minister and education minister, sic!).
Bombay burned twice, first in December 1992
and then again in January 1993. While the dastardly killing of the
‘Hindu’ Mathadi workers (isn’t it ironical that while we use identity
markers for the Mathadis or for the Radhabai Chawl inmates, we have
relegated the Muslims burned alive in a Maruti at Antop Hill, or the
young Muslim thrown into the mob and lynched by a cop, to just numbers?)
was one of the proverbial sparks for the communal conflagration, it was
not what started the violence.
Who Cast the First Stone is an
important tool that journalists covering all kinds of conflict need to
understand, calibrate, ponder over and develop. Gupta is no exception.
Within hours of the Babri Masjid being razed – and yes, the memory of
that event does sends a chill down our spine!!—victory processions
were believed to have been allowed in Dharavi, Pydhonie and other parts
of Mumbai by sections of the Mumbai Police. ‘Angry Muslims’, Mr. Gupta,
were not the first to burst out into Mumbai’s streets.
The spark that consumed Mumbai was lit by the Hindutvawaadis,
and a supine (or soft communal) Congress leadership in Maharashtra
(chief minister Sudhakarrao Naik carries the blame for allowing the Shiv
Sena to ‘literally get away with murder’) will historically carry the
blame. Veteran trade unionist Sharad Rao’s press conference of 7
December 1992 exposed and listed dozens of persons allegedly killed by
the Mumbai police’s bullets – overwhelmingly, the targets were the
city’s Muslims. Women and children in their homes were not spared in
this incomprehensible police behaviour.
Remember this:
Justice Srikrishna Point
2.4, Volume 1, Chapter 1 : From or about July 1992, the Bharatiya
Janata Party orchestrated its campaign for a construction of a temple at
Ayodhya by holding Ram Paduka processions, chowk sabhas and meetings…
Not only were these occasions used for exhorting Hindus to unite, but
some speeches and slogans on such occasions were downright communal,
warning Muslims that dissent on the Ram Janmabhoomi dispute would be an
act of treachery… Though ostensibly religious, the Ram Paduka
processions had less of religion and more of politics.
Which is why the BJP-SS called mahaartis (Chapter
2 of the Report) – a despicable communal roadside mobilisation that was
used by the SS-BJP’s saffron shirts to reportedly target minority homes
and properties – were singled out for condemnation by Justice
Srikrishna. Which is why the list of policemen found guilty of criminal
misconduct (and liable for punishment and prosecution for allowing
murder on their watch) never really paid for their crimes.
Collectively, the regimes that came to
power after 1999 (when the SS-BJP alliance was voted out) simply did not
care for institutional course-correction. Which is why even S.K. Bapat,
police commissioner of Mumbai during those dark days, failed, and
failed miserably at even attempting to curb the targeted and perpetrated
violence against Mumbai’s minorities.
If AK rifles, grenades and RDX were used for the shocking and murderous serial bomb blasts on 12 March, it was fireballs of kerosene, swords and trishuls that
generated neighbourhood terror for six days in December 1992 and
several weeks in January 1993. The Mumbai Police, which was until then
acknowledged as a professional force, came under a cloud for its deeply
partisan behaviour.
While top policeman quoted by Gupta speak
of the bomb blast plot and the ISI’s subsequent designs, other top
policemen who served and saw this city burn, Julio Ribeiro, Satish
Sahney, V.N. Deshmukh and Sanjay Pandey (to just name a few) worked hard
to repair the loss of faith in the police that this corrosive bias had
caused.
Deshmukh’s testimony before the Srikrishna
Commission candidly speaks of the dire tendency of the cadres of the
Hindutva right (the Shiv Sena and the RSS) being hired within the ranks
of the Maharashtra/Mumbai police. This journalist had taped wireless
messages, reflecting interjections to control room conversations, which
showed a more than worrisome bias in police behaviour.
And what about the role of journalists,
Gupta’s piteous whipping boys? Some of us, on the field, saw and
reported on the bloodthirst of both the mob and the bomb. Some of us
stuck to the story for years after the fires had died down, tirelessly
scripting the chronology of events as it took place.
In between, the silver screen saw Mani Ratnam’s Bombay and Anurag Kashyap’s Black Friday – long
before this latest biopic got Gupta so worked up – selectively portray a
particular narrative or even offer moral equivalence. None so far has
had the guts to tell it as it is: That India and Mumbai burned in the
fire of the Ramjanmabhoomi movement, which led to the Babri Masjid
demolition on 6 December 1992. And that these fires are still being
cynically ignited.
Teesta Setalvad is an activist, journalist and writer.
Read the original column by Shekhar Gupta hereTeesta Setalvad is an activist, journalist and writer.