Centre Asked To Make Lal Bahadur Shastri's Death Probe Records Public

NDTV: New Delhi: Monday, May 14, 2018.

The Central Information Commission has asked the Prime Minister's Office, the External Affairs Ministry and the Home Ministry to make the records of a committee, formed to probe the death of former Prime Minister Lal Bahudur Shastri in Tashkent, public. The Information Commissioner, Sridhar Acharyulu, has also directed the government to publish a statement of categories of documents available with them.

The Raj Narain Committee was reportedly formed by the Janata Dal government in 1977. It's mandate was to look into the circumstances of the death of the former Prime Minister on January 11, 1966, in Tashkent, hours after signing a declaration with Pakistan President Muhammad Ayub Khan after the 1965 Indo-Pak war.

The information commission noted that the records related to the committee's findings are untraceable.

"The public authorities referred above have a constitutional duty to inform and the people have legitimate expectation to know the truth behind the death of their beloved leader. More so, it is the primary responsibility of the PMO to inform the people what happened to late Lal Bahadur Shastri, who once was its head," Mr Acharyulu said.

Mr Acharyulu's directive came on an RTI application seeking to know from the Home Ministry whether Mr Shastri's body was brought to India for cremation or he was cremated in the then USSR . The applicant also sought a copy of the post-mortem report.

Mr Shastri died in Tashkent where he had gone for talks with the Pakistan President moderated by Soviet Premier Alexei Kosygin.

Although he died from a massive heart attack, questions were raised on the circumstances of his death on foreign soil when the cold war was at its peak.

The conspiracy theories were further fuelled after the central government started denying documents, under the RTI Act, related to his death, calling them secret.

The CIC in 2011, while hearing a separate case, had directed disclosure of 11 pages related to the death of Mr Shastri, but allowed withholding one document of the External Affairs Ministry which had reference to 'Mukti Bahini'.

The Home Ministry had transferred the present application of Navdeep Gupta to the National Archives of India (NAI).

During the hearing, the Central Public Information Officer (CPIO) representing the NAI told the commission that the information may be with the MEA, the Indian Embassy in Russia, the MHA or some other authority.

"The CPIO stated that except information of some news clippings they do not have any authentic document on Late PM's death or post-mortem," Mr Acharyulu noted.

While researching on the subject, Mr Acharyulu found an article which had claimed an inquiry committee under Mr Raj Narain was formed by the Janata Party government in 1977.

It was also reported that two crucial witnesses -- the personal physician of Mr Shastri, Mr RN Chugh, and his personal servant Mr Ram Nath --died in road accidents when they were coming to depose before the committee.

The article had claimed that the records related to the committee were not available even in the Parliament library.

Taking note, Mr Acharyulu asked the PMO, MHA and MEA to look for the records related to the committee.

He recommended the Parliament Secretariat to search in their library whether any records regarding the inquiry committee could be retrieved and if they are traced, they should be transferred to the NAI.

"The Commission considers that these offices (PMO, MHA and MEA) especially that of MHA require making a fresh effort to trace the details about Raj Narain inquiry report or related documents and tell the nation what was inquired and found," Acharyulu said.

He also directed the PMO, MEA and MHA to disclose records, including 11 pages related to the death held by Cabinet Secretariat which were earlier ordered to be disclosed by the CIC, pertaining to the issue.

Mr Acharyulu said that if any of these public authorities feel that some records may be secret and confidential attracting exemption clause of Section 8(1)(a) of the RTI Act, they must produce it in a sealed cover before it to adjudicate whether assumptions are correct or not.