The Hindu: Pune: Thursday,
June 13, 2013.
On the night
of November 26, 2008 in Mumbai, every minute mattered. Frantic phone calls were
being made from the South Control room which was the closest to the place where
the brutal terror attacks started. The record of the call logs would have had
the answer to what really transpired on the ground. However, RTI applications
have revealed that the Maharashtra has three different records for the same set
of calls made to and from the police officers who were in confrontation with
the terrorists.
These
records, accessed by slain officer Ashok Kamte's wife Vinita Kamte, have raised
suspicions about the authenticity of any of the versions while also questioning
the government's reason for having three separate records, which differ in hand
writing and timing.
Ms Kamte has
approached the State Chief Information Commissioner (SCIC). In an order dated
April 2nd,2013, SCIC Ratnakar Gaikwad has directed the Additional Home Secretary
to investigate into the matter and punish the individuals responsible for the
alleged tampering. The order also underlines the seriousness of the discrepancy
while saying, “This matter is very sensitive and it is important to establish
that the information given to Ms Kamte is not with any ulterior motive.”
The call logs
refer to the Cama Hospital incident in which two terrorists including Ajmal
kasab opened fire. It was here that ATS chief Hemant Karkare, Additional
Commissioner for Eastern Region, Ashok Kamte and encounter specialist Vijay
Salaskar were killed by the terrorists. Speaking to The Hindu, Ms Kamte stated
that the timing mentioned in the records differ by a few minutes, but even that
was extremely crucial considering the seriousness of the incident.
“Was it
because the officers weren't provided with the help of man force that they
needed?,” Ms Kamte asked. “I want the government to answer why they felt the
need to make two different records of the same calls,” she states. The documents
which are in possession of The Hindu, also reveal a distinct difference in
handwriting.
While the
timings and handwriting differ in the two sets of records accessed under the
Right to Information Act (RTI) on two separate occasions, the charge sheet carries
an entirely different version, Ms Kamte has alleged. However, the motive of the
alleged tampering remains unclear, raising the question whether the Maharashtra
government is trying to hide something.
Ms Kamte
stated that her earlier requests to access the call log records were turned
down by the Mumbai police. It was only after the charge sheet in the case was
filed in February 2009 that her requests were heeded to. Eventually, she got
the first call log records on November 5, 2009.
“Incidentally,
when I asked for records of calls to the police number 100, another set of the
same call log was given to me, this time in a different handwriting, and the
contents and timings were different too,” Ms Kamte said. The second document
was given to her on February 8, 2010.
For example,
the first record given to Ms Kamte in November 2008 states that at 23.54, on
November 26 a phone call was made to the South Centre stating that there seems
to be chaos and people are saying that a man (possibly one of the terrorists)
is seen coming. However, the second record given in February 2009 does not
carry a record of the phone call at all. In the chargesheet, the same phone
call is listed at 23.50 hours, Ms Kamte explained.
In a hearing
conducted on April 24, Additional Police Commissioner (Administration) ND Pawar
failed to answer as to why there is discrepancy in information in the three
sets of the same call log records.
In the appeal
to the SCIC, Ms Kamte has said, “Since both the call log records pertain to the
same channel i.e South Channel, there ought not to have been any difference
between the two copies and both ought to have been the identical copies of the
original call log register. It is thus evident that the public information
officers, knowingly gave incorrect and misleading information to me and it is
in these circumstances, that I have lodged the present complaint.”
“This raises
many questions about the manner of investigation of the entire case that the
government needs to answer,” she stated.
.JPG)
.JPG)
