Policeman as diplomat

Bapat maintained that demolitions of unauthorised structures in Muslim-majority areas and continuous pressure on criminal gangs ignited the December riots after the demolition of the Babri Masjid. Moreover, there was no material on record to show that the Shiv Sena as a political party had indulged in any violent activities or supported them. Ditto for Muslim organisations.

Why Justice Srikrishna does not buy this exercise in diplomacy is evident from the contrary evidence that was presented before the Commission.

Says the report: 8220;There is, however, the curious BC message no 386 dated December 8, 1992, in which the police were specially called upon to take preventive action against the activists and 8220;communal goondas8221; of the BJP, Shiv Sena and other organisations. Bapat8217;s explanation for giving this message is that the BJP and Sena had given a call for a bandh on December 9 and, therefore, he had issued such instructions. The explanation appears to be tepid.8221; The term8220;communal goonda8221; is dwelt upon extensively by Justice Srikrishna in his dealings with Bapat8217;s testimony.

It occurs in a Government guideline dated April 30, 1986 on Dealing With Communal Disturbances, intended for the knowledge and guidance of police officers.

Dealing with it in detail, Justice Srikrishna says, 8220;In Chapter II, para 2.4, the guidelines in no uncertain terms identify 13 parties/organisations in Maharashtra as communal. Out of them the only material which has come on record with regard to any communal party are the activities of the RSS and Shiv Sena. There is no material to suggest that activists of any of the other communal organisations named in para 2.4 in these guidelines had indulged in riotous or violent activity. As far as the RSS is concerned, the evidence only suggests that along with its affiliated organisations like BJP, VHP and Bajrang Dal, it had militantly advocated the building of the Ram temple8230; in Ayodhya. There is no material that any of the activists of theRSS or any other party barring the Shiv Sena had indulged in any violent activity during either phase of rioting.8221;

In the face of these guidelines and the material which the police were in possession of 8220;the attempt of Commissioner Bapat to give a sanitised version and a diplomatic answer does not impress the Commission8221;, he says.

Chapter III of these guidelines exhort the police stations to maintain a list of communal goondas, but, says Justice Srikrishna, 8220;police officer after police officer8221; said that their stations had no such lists 8220;and some of them even confessed that they did not understand the meaning of the expression communal goonda8216; as used in the Commissioner8217;s message8221;.

Justice Srikrishna presumes the guidelines were issued by the government after informing itself of the recommendations made by several commissions on the vexed issue of communal riots.

8220;It is unfortunate that these guidelines do not percolate down to the level of the local police stations. Ergo,Commissioner Bapat was able to assert boldly that he was not in possession of any material to indicate that any party or organisation had a hand in the riots. In fact, Bapat8217;s argument that he would be unwilling to name the Shiv Sena as a communal party because it has been registered with the Election Commissioner flies in the face of these guidelines which were binding on him and which he was expected to implement.8221;

Even with regard to Muslim organisations expressly listed as communal8217; under the guidelines, there does not seem to be any serious attempt to identify them in the context of the two riots, the report says. 8220;If this be the attitude of the police, there would obviously be no long-term solution to the problem of communal disturbances.8221; The Commission has also rejected Bapat8217;s reason for not slapping TADA on the Sena8217;s Madhukar Sarpotdar and on Vivek Maitra, personal assistant of Gopinath Munde of the BJP. An unlicensed weapon was recovered from Sarpotdar8217;s possession at the height of thecommunal riots in an area notified under section 3 of the TADA act and Maitra 8220;was also found carrying a fire-arm, for which he possessed no valid license in a communally disturbed area8221;.

The Commissioner8217;s reason: 8220;He says that the senior Police Inspector did not make a proposal and therefore he did not have occasion to apply his mind to it.8221; Justice Srikrishna has described this as 8220;difficult to accept8221; and says, 8220;Reading the affidavit of Bapat as a whole, it appears to the Commission that either he had been misled by his subordinate officers who fed him only information to suit a particular stand or that he was a party to it.8221;

Justice Srikrishna also criticises then Joint Commissioner R.D. Tyagi for being similarly diplomatic and has a word of praise only for one police officer: Vasant Narsingrao Deshmukh, then Additional Commissioner of Police of the Special Branch-I CID who was then in charge of the intelligence branch of the Bombay police whose duty it was to brief the Commissioner of Policeand the Government of Maharashtra 8220;regarding his assessments made on the basis of intelligence inputs gathered by his department8221;.

Says Justice Srikrishna: 8220;He is one police officer who seems to have been aware of the Communal Riot Scheme under which each police station had to maintain a list of communal goondas.8221;

And who might they be? 8220;As ACP SB-I he had identified the Shiv Sena and Dalit Panthers as two political parties and the Islamic Seva Sangh as one Muslim organisation with propensity for violence and creation of breakdown of law and order,8221; he adds.