SANJEEV BHATT EPISODE:

MY COMMENTS To Email forwarded to me by swarnim.gujarat2010@gmail.com on

article published on May 1, 2011 at Ahmedabad. The original long article published is
reproduced after my comments.

(1)Department inquiries and departmental chargesheets and punishments must not be

considered to establish the character of the officer or an employee. I worked for eleven
years in railways and ten years in education department, it is my experience that dirty
politics and dirty maneuvers are being normally played to stop promotion of an officer or
an employee. An employee can be easily harassed by the superiors in the government.
So, no departmental punishment or charge sheet can be displayed to spoil the character of
an employee.

(2)The waiting of nine years to file an affidavit may be due to the fact that Nanavati
Commission, Benergee commission and SIT were being investigating the allegations
against Modi. Mr. Sanjeev Bhatt may be waiting for the result and truth. He might have
thought that if the truth did not open up in the investigation, he would file an affidavit.

(3)One thing must be clear. Adolf Hiltor was a ruler in Germany. Under his rule,
Germany developed so high in technology that flying bombs (present day missiles) were
developed. He used such flying bombs in world war II. Entire europe, britain and France
were astonished to see that. Now see, can anybody say that Hitlor was a good ruler?
Developments of state or country depend upon richness of sources. Any other ruler than
Modi could have developed Gujarat like the Gujarat is at the present looking to
availability of sources after free trade agreement and dual citizenship (Indian Overseas
citizen) have brought in huge resources in the Gujarat in particular and India in general.
So, Modi cannot be credited for the developments.

(4)I am surprised that 5000 muslims in Gujarat were slaughtered and the ruler is ruling
till date. What kind of election commission is there in India which allows such rulers
whose election speech is openly against the Muslims. Indian Constitution does not permit
any person to contest the election who has not behaved equally for all the people of India.
Even recent SIT concluded that Modi's mental attitude is against Muslims! How can such
a person be even a representative of the democratic system of a country?

(5)On one side, India is shouting against terror attack on Mumbai while on the other
hand, open terrorist ruler and killer of 5000 muslims is ruling the state of Gujarat ! NO
WAY.

The Original Article Published by swarnim.gujarat2010@gmail.com is as this:

Its quite amazing and disturbing that till now there were allegations of all sorts on
Modi but now even the SIT is under the scanner( Narendra Modi, Godhra & Gujarat
riots: IBN-Live ‘Disregards’ Truth!
). Its difficult to understand, how we can allege someone like Modi, we can mistrust an
independent agency of the stature of SIT and give so much weightage to people like
Sanjiv Bhatt and Teesta Setalvad. This is despite the fact that their own credentials
are questionable. We have witnessed how teesta and her likes have changed colours
over a period of time, sanjiv bhatt’s character too is unfolding gradually. There are
reports that his career and conduct have been questionable since years. There have
been many departmental inquiries against him and even a criminal case for beating
someone to death !!! And for the so called intelligentsia, many inquiries are before
2002. We question the credentials of a Chief Minister who has presented himself
before the SIT for hours together and patiently replied to all their questions, we
question the credentials of SIT itself and we trust Sanjiv Bhatt? Why? Who are those
elements who are interested in creating such hype?

Too much is being read in to the affidavit and media hype of Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, who has been
sleeping all through the last nine years of the incidents of riots. Neither he opted to file any
affidavit before the Justice Nanvati Inquiry Commission, nor he provided any such
information as being allegedly disclosed now to his superior Officer namely Shri RB
Shreekumar Adl. DGP in charge of Intelligence, when he filed affidavit before the Nanvati
Inquiry Commission. The recent Star TV interview of Shri Shreekumar telecast in the
third week of April 2011 may be seen in this regard.

Yet, the controversial officer has now come out with a theory that he had attended the
meeting on 27-02-2002 when alleged illegal instructions were given by the Chief Minister. He
has cited the support of a driver, who allegedly took him to the CM’s residence where the
meeting took place. In fact the driver had been dismissed from the service long back for
serious misconduct of forgery of certificates to obtain the driver’s job. It is strange that the
statement of the disgruntled officer and the dismissed driver are being given such hype while
ignoring the statements of other most senior Police and IAS officers who remained present
during the meeting on 27th February 2002.

Besides, It is also quite unfortunate that the so called intelligent people, who try to
allege the Gujarat government for not divulging records, in their blogs & panel
discussion on TV channels, have missed one thing that when a junior officer attends
any such high level meeting, as per procedure he is supposed to put up the
proceedings/ notes before the Superior officer about the deliberations. The
Intelligence Manual requires that such things are brought to the notice of senior
officer in writing. It is difficult to imagine why Sanjiv Bhatt did not do so at the relevant
time. In fact, he was posted as DCI (Security) who is supposed to look after
intelligence on VIP security and security to vital installations etc. only. Another DCI
was there to look after law& order and communal matters.

Shri Sanjiv Bhatt had never been provided “y” category security by the government. There is
a procedure to asses threat perception of a person where a Committee consisting of the
Home Secretary, Additional DGP (Intelligence) and the Joint Director of the Central IB
consider the category of the security cover required for a person and on this
recommendation such security is provided by the government. No such recommendation has
ever been made for Shri Sanjiv Bhatt. Further, on the reference of the SIT appointed by the
Supreme Court, the Home Secretary wrote to the DGP to look in to the security cover for
Shri Sanjiv Bhatt. The DGP provided appropriate security to him. The allegation that the
government has withdrawn his security is false and baseless. Shri Sanjiv Bhatt is trying to
create false impression deliberately to cover up his misconduct of keeping personnel from
Juanagadh at his residence at Ahmedabad.
It may be mentioned that Shri Sanjiv Bhatt has been in the habit of keeping more
personnel at his residence in excess of the orderlies entitled. There had been such
instances when he was posted at Banaskantha and at Rajkot earlier. Show cause
notices were also issued at the relevant time.

At present he has been posted at Junagadh SRP training School where he has joined and
went on leave. Currently he is on sick leave on account of his mother’s alleged ill health. Yet
he has been keeping the personnel from Junagadh and the Vehicle allotted to him at
Ahmedabad on the pretext that the SIT would call him anytime for deposition. Though the
SIT has already recorded his statement yet he is claiming this privilege. Besides, an officer
can appear in any forum from his place of posting for which one need not to remain present
at the location where he chooses to place himself.

It may be mentioned that Shri Sanjeev Bhatt is an IPS officer of 1988 batch belonging to
Gujarat cadre, whose career since the beginning of his service has remained controversial.
He is facing several departmental proceedings and criminal cases of serious nature. Often
he has been taking undue advantage of the government citing different arguments of his
actions of omission and commission as part of his duty. However, many departmental
inquiries could not be settled and the criminal cases against him are still pending for which
he ahs been trying to get favour from the government. Even he has not been promoted as
IGP though his batch mates have been promoted long back.

He was posted in as ASP Jamnagar district when there was an agitation at Khamabliya. It
was reported that he committed excessive use of power and clamping of draconian
provisions of TADA on some of the protestors. Police (ASP) in Jamnagar district was marked
with an incident of misuse of power resulting to death of a person. There was a private
criminal complaint filed at Jamjodhpur Police station against him on 18-11-1990 by one Shri
Amrutlal Madhavji Vaishnani. This case is still pending at Sessions Court at Kahambalia.

A criminal complaint was filed in 1996 by one Shri Sumer Singh Rajpurohit, an Advocate
practicing at Pali, Rajasthan against Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, the then SP, Banaskantha District. A
criminal case was registered against Shri Sanjiv Bhatt & others vide FIR No. 403/96 dtd. 18-
11-1996 u/s 120B, 195, 196, 342, 347, 357, 365, 388, 458, 482 IPC and Sec. 58 (1) & 58 (2)
of NDPS Act. After the investigation, a chargesheet was filed against Shri Sanjiv Bhatt &
others u/s 114, 120B, 323, 342, 348, 357, 365, 368, 388, 452, 201 & 482 IPC and Sec. 9, 17,
18, 29, 58 (1) & 58 (2) r/w Sec. 37 of NDPS Act in the Court of Special Judge, NDPS Act,
Jodhpur, Rajasthan. It is mentioned that Shri Sumer Singh Rajput was a tenant of sister of
Shri R.R. Jain, a sitting Judge of Gujarat High Court. To get the tenant evacuated for the
rented premises, Shri Sanjiv Bhatt, the then SP of Banaskanthe and his subordinate police
officers planted more than 1kg of Narcotic drug in one room in a hotel at Palanpur, Gujarat,
which was shown that the complainant was occupying the same while the complainant was
at Pali, Rajasthan. The said complainant Advocate was abducted at midnight from Pali on
the instructions of Shri Sanjiv Bhatt by his subordinate police staff and brought him to
Palanpur, Banaskantha in Gujarat. The said Advocate was pressurized by Shri Sanjiv Bhatt
and his subordinate police officers to vacate the said rented premises by threatening arrest
under offence under NDPSAct. The Advocate under pressure vacated the property. Physical
possession of the property was immediately handed over to sister of Shri R.R. Jain, Judge of
Gujarat High Court. Shri Sanjiv Bhatt asked released Shri Sumersingh Rajpurohit on 08-05-
1996, after filing a report u/s 169 Cr.P.C., in which it was stated that Shri Sumer Singh could
not be identified in the Test Identification Parade.

Applications were filed for quashing the criminal complaint filed in Pali at Gujarat and
Rajasthan High Court. But the petitions have been dismissed and the criminal case is still
pending. Also, the Gujarat Vigilance Commission had recommended twice on 15-07-2002
and 19-10-2006for suspension of Shri Sanjiv Bhatt for his professional misconducts.His stint
as Assistant Superintendent of The Secretary, Bar Association, Pali (Rajasthan) made a
complaint before the National Human Rights Commission. The Commission considering the
serious human right violation by its order dated 15-09-2010 directed the State Govt. of
Gujarat to pay a sum of Rs. One lakh as monetary relief to Shri Sumer Singh, advocate, Pali.
The Gujarat government issued order dated 23-12-2010 as per the direction of the NHRC to
pay the amount. A cheque was issued on 25-01-2011 in favour of Shri S.C. Rajpurohit.

Since the criminal proceeding is pending against him and as one charge sheet has
been issued to him, he has grievances against the state government. He has been
trying to get these issues settled and get his overdue promotion as IGP.

It would be amply clear from the above details that the entire service career of Shri
Sanjeev Bhatt has remained controversial and wherever he has been posted,
controversies have followed him. He has many issues which are to be settled with
government like the pending departmental inquiry, criminal cases and the current
posting where he has joined and currently on unsanctioned sick leave to settle. The
ulterior motive behind his recent demeanor becomes quite clear with these details. We
all have witnessed the sanctity of affidavits in the series of them filed by Teesta
Setalvad. Let us see how the character of Sanjiv Bhatt unfolds gradually.
Source Link