My life under threat in Mumbai: D G Vanzara

[related-post]

Following the High Court relief, Vanzara filed for bail modification plea stating, “…the applicant (Vanzara) is Z-category protected person and so far the Mumbai city is concerned, it is the native place of hardcore and internationally declared criminals like Dawood Ibrahim, Chhota Shakeel and others who are facing red corner notices. The applicant while on service has booked such criminals and detected and unearthed the criminal conspiracies and their crime against the nation and the terrorists’ acts conspired or committed by them.”

The plea further states, “The applicant has constant and serious threat from such declared criminals as well as certain terrorist groups like SIMI, India (Indian) Mujahidin and Lashkar-e-Toiba, Jaise Mohammad (Jaish-e-Mohammad), etc. Such terrorist groups have wide spread networks in the city of Mumbai, therefore the applicant is facing serious threat to his life in Mumbai…accordingly, to force the applicant to stay in Mumbai or outside Gujarat would amount to putting the applicant inside the jaws of death.”

The application also says that Vanzara is suffering from “skin allergy disease and the doctors at Ahmedabad have advised him to avail home-made food with various changes in food items and on experiment bases so as to detect the allergenic food substance.” It further adds that Mumbai is not his home and home food is not possible.

Vanzara also sought parity with his senior officer and co-accused DGP P P Pandey. He said in the application, “Charges levelled against him (Pandey) are either equal or more grave than the applicant. However, there is no condition of bail order of Pandey for not to enter Gujarat.”

His plea also says, “The Maharashtra government has also extended such Z security cover to the applicant, but the applicant found that there are so many lapses in such security cover which are contently dangerous to the life and liberty of the applicant.”

Vanzara’s lawyer V D Gajjar, while arguing for modification before the special judge S J Raje, also cited the recent statements of two Intelligence Bureau (IB) in the media. Without naming them, Gajjar said that these officers are witnesses who have turned hostile. “They are saying the truth. The rest of the witnesses are policemen who were very much accused in the case. The entire existence of the chargesheet filed in this case by the CBI is at stake.”

Gajjar also orally told the court about the deposition of David Coleman Headley before a Mumbai court where he said that Ishrat Jahan was a Lashkar-e-Toiba operative. CBI counsel R C Kodekar objected to Vanzara’s move. He said, “We are concerned about the witnesses being tampered and hampered if the modification is allowed.” Earlier, CBI filed a one-page reply, signed by police inspector Ketan Mehta, stating, “The application is devoid of merit and may please be rejected outrightly in the interest of justice.”