Nanavati Commision Says Godhra Train Carnage A Conspiracy

The Nanavati Commission , set up by the Gujarat Chief Minster, Mr. Narendra Modi’s Government in 2002 to inquire into the fire on coach S-6 of the Sabarmati Express train in Which 58 Kar Sewaks Were burnt alive , has concluded that the fire was a “ pre-planned conspiracy” by local Muslims. The report of the commission totally contradicts the conclusion of the U. C. Banerjde Bommhssinn , appnintdd bx thd Rahlwax Minster, Mr. L`lu Prasad Yadav, which stated that the fire was “ purely accidental”. The Banerjee Commission report was made public but is yet to be tabled in the Parliament because of a stay order by the Gujarat High Court .The first part of the Nanavati Commission’s 168- page report was tabled in the Gujarat Assembly on Septerber 25, 2008 by the Chief minister, Mr. Narendra Modi The first part, of the report, which exclusively deals, with the train carnage , and not the post –Godhra communal riots, gave a clean chit to the Chief Minister , Mr. Narendra Modi , the members of his the then Council of Ministers and police officers . It also ruled out the involvement of any religious or political organization in the fire .The report stated that the Commission has come to the conclusion that “there was a conspiracy to burn coach S-6 of the Sabarmati Express train coming from Ayodhya and to cause harm to the Kar Sewaks traveling in that coach”. The conspiracy hatched appears to be a “part of a larger conspiracy to create terror and destabilize the administration”. the report stated.The report also rejected the allegations that the Gujarat Government failed to comply with the recommendations and directions given by the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC). The report of the Godhra riots would come later in the second part yet to be finalised by the Commission.The evidence recorded by the Commission also claimed that a mob of Muslims attacked the train and stoned the coaches so heavily that the passengers could not come out. This was to ensure maximum casualties when the S-6 coach of the Sabarmati Express train was set a fire.The Commission, in its 168-page report , stated that the conspiracy was hatched by some local Muslims at the Aman-Guest House in Godhra the previous night . The conspirators immediately made arrangements for collecting about 140 litres of petrol from a nearby petrol pump on the night of February 26, 2002. The next day when the train arrived in Godhra , ond person knov by the namd Harsan Lala, after forbibly opening the vestibule between coaches S-6 and S-7, entered S-6 and threw burning rage setting it on fire.According to the report , setting fire to the train was part of a larger conspiracy to instill a sense of fear in the administration and create anarchy in the State. It ,however, has not named the architects of the larger conspiracy. The Commission disagreed with the contentions of the Benerjee Committee and the Jan Sangharsha Manch, which represented the riot victims before the Commission , that alarm chains could not be operated from outside under the modified system introduced by the Railways in 1995. The Commission stated that the passengers of the train were attacked the second time some three hours after the stone throwing and burning incident when the train was being shunted to detach the two affected coaches.The Commission claimed that there was no evidence to justify the contention that the Kar Sewaks had been fighting with Muslim vendors at stations before Godhra as alleged earlier , though there were some minor scuffles with three Muslim vendors on the Godhra platform . But there was no reliable evidence to show that any attempt was made by the Kar Sewaks to spread violence. It dismissed as not worthy of any credence the Manch theory that there was no crowd ,except a small group of curious onlookers, no stone-throwing and no conspirational setting on fire. Without mentioning the Benerjee Commission report , the Nanavati Panel rejected the accidental fire theory. It stated that the reasoning that a fire was caused by fire the overturning of a burning stove used for cooking by some Kar Sewaks in the compartment or that it was set off by an electric short circuit was baseless. There was no space for anyone to light the stove in the overcrowded coach carrying more than 200 passengers and any spill- over of kerosene from the stove , though out the question ,could not have caused such heavy fire and damage. Dismissing the short circuit theorx, the Cnmmirsion st`ted that in such an event the p`ssengers would not have climbed up to the upper berths to protect themselves as electric lines were going through the top of the coaches , and rather they would have climbed down on the floor. In such an event , the windows on the platform side of the coach would not have been closed or the windowpanes broken by stone throwing. The smoke before fire did not necessarily mean electric short circuit as propounded by the Manch; instead , the fire was caused by some inflammable materials thrown on the floor from outside, the report concluded.Now one looks forward to the second part of the report and the findings of the Supreme Court- appointed special Investigation Team (SIT) , for a more comprehensive view of what happened during the terrible days of carnage in Gujarat in 2002, But as things stand, the Nanavati Commission report raises some questions. In the first place, Gujarat’s Forensic Science Laboratory had conducted a study of the Godhra train carnage and concluded that the inflammable liquid that caused the fire was spread from inside , not outside the coach. Both the Benerjee Commission’s and forensic laboratory’s versions of the train fire are contradicted by the Nanavati Commission's version.
BANERJEE VS NANAVATI REPORT
Justice Banerjee Commission Report

1. Not deliberately inflicted, but accidental2. Petrol theory ruled out , fire sequence against it

3. Fire not caused by outsiders, Intelligence agencies had no Information about Kar Sewaks coming

4. Doors closed a misconception

5. Deaths due to toxicity and suffocation

6. Large number nf whtnerses exalined,but no clue about cause of fire

7. Railways failed to conduct a statutory inquiry

Justice Nanavati Commission Report

1. Pre-planned, a conspiracy and not accidental

2. 140 litres of petrol purchased to burn bogey

3. Umarji conspired, Hassan Lala threw burning rags inside the bogey

4. Door of S-6 and S-7 bogey forcibly opened

5. Kar Sewaks burnt to death,conspiracy hatched at Aman guest house

6. 1,106 witnessds, 46,000 affidavits

7. No evidence to show that the Gujarat CM, Mr. Narendra Modi, any minister or police officers played a role

Tata’s Nano Moves From Singur To Sanand

Tata Group and the Gujarat Government on October 7, 2008 signed an agreement for production of Nano in Gandhinagar, Gujarat. The State Principal Secretary, Industries, Mr. Gauri Kumar, and Tata Group Managing Director Mr. Ravi Kant signed the documents in the presence of Mr. Ratan Tata and Chief Minister Mr. Narendra Modi . The agreement ended the speculation on the relocation of the project that had been marred by controversy since work began two years ago in Singur, West Bengal.Tata has been allocated 1,100 acres at Chharodi and Charal villages in Sanand , just 25km. from Ahmedabad . The land was part of about 2,200 acres owned by the Gujarat Agricultural University for running a cattle from and experimental crop cultivation and cattle breeding . The land has been allocated to Tata Motors for the Nano small car project “at the prevailing market price” in the area.The plant, to be set up at Sanand , will initially have an annual capacity of 2.50 lakh units , which will be expanded to 5 lakh units per year. Tata Group will invest Rs. 2,000 crore in the first phase of the project and the car is slated to roll out from the first quarter of 2009.Mr. Modi and Mr. Tata described the agreement as “historic” and hoped that after the “unfortunate turmoil” the project underwent is Singur, it would now have a “smooth sailing”.Earlier, Tata Motors announced its decision on October 3, 2008 to pull out of Singur in West Bengal. The decision was taken in the interests of the Nano small car project’s success and viability and in the light of the Opposition’s continued and heightened agitation .The much-anticipated curtain to the project came after the Tata Group Chairman Mr. Ratan Tata met West Bengal’s Chief Minister, Mr. Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee, who failed to convince the Trinamool Congress leader Ms. Mamata Banerjee to withdraw the farmers’ agitation on acquisition of land . The Chairman of the Tata Group ,Mr. Ratan Tata ,Said “we have taken the very regretful decision to move the Nano project out of West Bengal; we are left with no option”.The Tata Group Chairman blamed Ms. Mamata for pushing him to take the pullout decision, two years after his tryst with the Nano Car factory in West Bengal began.

RIL Begins Production Of Crude Oil In Krishna Godavari Basin

In a significant development India’s industrial giant Reliance Industries Limited (RIL) , the country’s biggest private sector company on the basis of turnover, started production of crude oil at KG- D 6 block of the Krishna Godavari basin on September 17,2008 . According to RIL Chairman Mr. Mukesh Ambani , the field would initially produce about 5,000 barrels of crude per day.Reliance is the biggest exploration acreage holder in the private sector in India. RIL’s exploration and production assets comprise 54 blocks across eight countries. The Company , which boasts of a success ratio of over 60 percent , has so far 42 discoveries to its name . The KG-D6 venture is a first –of its – kind hydrocarbon production from any deep water field in India. The venture is slated to account for 40 percent of India’s current indigenous hydrocarbons production in a matter of one and a half years. According to company estimates, the production from the KG_D6 facility will help the country save a yearly foreign exchange outflow of $20 billion.The KG-D 6 block (KG-DWN-98/3) was awarded to RIL under the National Exploration Licensing Policy (NELP)- I. In the venture , RIL holds 90 percent participation interest while Niko Resources Limited holds 10 percent. The block is located in the Bay of Bengal, 50 km off the Kakinada coast (Andhra Pradesh), at a depth of 8,000 feet. The company has commenced production within just over two years from the time of oil discovery , making KG-D6 one of the faster Greenfield deep water oil development projects in the world.India’s current hydrocarbon oil and gas production is 1.3 million barrels of oil equivalent per day (boepd). An initial flow of 5,000 barrels per day is expected to go up to 5,50,000 barrels of oil equivalent over the next six to eight quarters. 5,50,000 barrels per day of hydrocarbons can pump cooking gas to 100-200 million households. 2,000 engineers, technical and management personnel worked on the project.The vessel employed in the project , Dhirubhai-1 is the first vessel of its kind in Indian waters and has the ability to operate in water depths of greater than 1,200 metres. The vessel boasts of a number of features which can help it withstand harsh sea conditions.What makes RIL’s feat more special is the fact that production was achieved despite challenges such as harsh environment , lack of data, low seabed, severe temperature , supply-related problems and shortage of competent technicians. The company sources made it clear that the refinery would begin production in the next few months and gas production would commence from early 2009

Cabinet Approves Judges Inquiry (Amendment ) Bill

The Union Cabinet approved the Judges Inquiry (Amendment) Bill, 2008, on October 8, 2008. The new Bill makes Supreme Court and High court Judges accountable for their acts, including corruption and incapacity . With the introduction of this bill, the Judges Inquiry Bill, 2006 would be withdrawn.The Bill provides for establishing a National Judicial Council (NJC) to investigate and inquire into allegations of misbehavior or incapacity on the part of a judge of the Supreme Court or of a High court as well as regulate the procedure for investigation and inquiry. Thus , the provisions of the new Bill would bring about transparency in the functioning of the judiciary by making judges more accountable and would also enhance its prestige.Any person can complain to the NJC against judges of the Supreme Court (except the CJI), and the Chief Justices and judges of the High Courts . If the complaint is against a Supreme court Judge, the NJC will consist of the CJI and four seniormost judges of the apex court . If it is against the CJI , the CJI will not take part in the proceedings and the President shall nominate the next seniormost judge.In the new Bill, there is a provision for preliminary scrutiny and verification by the NJC . if a judge is proved guilty, the NJC can recommend his or her removal through impeachment by the parliament. However, where the proved misbehavior does not warrant removal , the NJc can impose minor measures such as issuing advisory , requesting retirement, stoppage of assignment of judicial work for a limited time, and warning censure or admonition (public or private). The NJC cannot impose or recommend any minor measure in the case of a reference by the Speaker of the Lock Sabha or the Chairman of the Rajya Sabha on a motion for removal.

Smoking Ban Across Indian Comes Into Force

The notification issued on May 30, 2008 by the Union Health Minister, Dr. Anbumani Ramadoss , for the ban under the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products Act, 2003 came into force on Gandhi Jayanti i.e. October 2, 2008. Smoking is banned at public place all over the country. Any violation of the ban is a punishable offence with a fine up to Rs. 200.Union Health Minister Dr. Ramadoss welcomed the Supreme Court order declining to stay the Centre’s notification prohibiting smoking . The Supreme Court , on September 29, 2008. had refused to stay ban on smoking in public places. A Bench consisting of Justice B. Agrawal and Justice G.S. Singhvi rejected the contention that enforcement of the notification would result in inspector raj and needless harassment , thus paving the way for implementation of the Centre’s notification dated May 30, 2008.Dr Ramadoss described the ban as a major step towards providing a smoke-free atmosphere and protecting non- smokers from passive smoking . He said he had personally written to Governors. Chief Ministers , Health Ministers and Members of Parliament to ensure effective implementation of the ban. According to him , Delhi , Jharkhand and Chandigarh are some States which have already begun implementing the ban. In case of Maharashtra and Bihar which expressed their inability to impose it, he said all effortr , hncltdinf litigation , would be lade to presrurise the States to implement the prohibition . Massive publicity and awareness campaigns would also be launched .Smoking will be prohibited at all places to which the public has access, including auditoriums, health institutions, government buildings , stadiums, workplace , shopping malls , restaurants, etc. However in case of large hotels and restaurants having more than 30 rooms or 30 seats , and airports, a provision for a separate smoking area is made . Further , the States might create a separate head of account in which the fine could be deposited . The department could use the money for tobacco control activities.