Rana Ayyub wrote in her opinion article titled 'A new low in Indian politics', that had been taken down from the DNA newspaper's website, without any justification given to her, she said, "As a journalist,covering Gujarat extensively since 2005, as someone who exposed Shah’s role in the fake encounters in the state and who can claim to have knowledge of his political trajectory, I would not mince my words in suggesting that by appointing Amit Shah as the president of the party, the BJP has hugely disrespected the law of the land and signalled an all time low for the criminal justice system of India."
"For the cases against Shah are for crimes so gruesome that the cloak of political astuteness will be too short to cover it. In its charge sheet filed in the Sohrabuddin fake encounter case, the CBI which had been investigating the case under the watchful eye of the Supreme Court of India had not just named Shah as one of the key accused and conspirators but also named him as the head of an extortion racket which involved underworld thugs, politicians and businessmen".
"In its submission before the apex court bench of Justice P Sathasivam and Justice BS Chauhan, the CBI stated that the minister was in cahoots with senior cops from Gujarat including the likes of DG Vanzara and Abhay Chudasama who had been sentenced for cold-blooded murder – concluding that Shah was a hardcore criminal. Shah was also charge sheeted in the murder of Kauser Bi, the wife of Sohrabuddin who according to the official papers was raped, sedated, killed and her body burnt and thrown in a river."
INDIA HONEST agrees with the substance drawn by the decade long old journalist, who herself, boasted of covering extensively the fake encounter allegation on Gujarat police, and dominated her attention on role of Amit Shah in the fake encounter.
Yes, truthfully she admired herself as the one who "exposed" Shah's role in the encounter, while denying the role of vast pool of CBI officers, who acted under the guidance of Supreme Court of India.
It may be in line with many of the cases filed against Modi by the UPA government and fought by Narendra Modi as CM, for Gujarat riots of 2002 at high court, through SIT investigations and under the Supreme Court.The SIT has only recently declared Modi clear of the charges on his involvement.
Madam Rana ran one step fast in concluding the fact of "not acceptance of the nomination of Gopal Subramaniam" as a Supreme court judge,only as because he was also the amicus curiae in the Sohrabuddin fake encounter case.
More astonishing is her approach on the status of various governors, when she concluded in her words that, "Ever since the Prime Minister assumed office, ex-CBI directors including Ashwini Kumar and AP Singh who were at the helm of affairs in the CBI during the investigation of the encounters, find themselves being at the receiving end of Shah's wrath. While Kumar has stepped down as governor of Nagaland, AP Singh is reportedly under pressure to step down as member of the UPSC after the Income Tax department served notices to him and his family members in an investigation into alleged tax evasion by meat exporter Moin Qureshi".
This conclusion by the journalist has exposed her bias, who alike the Congress party remained indulged in one point goal to trap Narendra Modi some how, be it fake encounters, involvement in riots, snooping or even falsification of his martial status, and now blamed for the intimidation's.
But alike Congress, none should forget that in a democracy people are the best and supreme judge, and they have given their verdict loud and clear. And alike Modi, Amit Shah has also been overwhelmingly accepted by people of UP, by giving BJP huge mandate of 73 out of 80 seats.
INDIA HONEST assumes that the famous journalist Rana Ayyub must have drew the inspiration to investigate the case because of one fact that Amit Shah was targeted and charged for the fake encounter (by Congress party appointed CBI and other investigation agencies),and one important fact that only this case was selected out of ten thousand encounters, that took place in India in last decade, when she wrote, "One could have well debated the merits of the CBI charge sheet and read political motives but for the fact that the Supreme court itself gave CBI the sanction to arrest Shah at the same time, coming down harshly on the Gujarat state police investigation led by the then top cop Geeta Johri for going slow and misleading the courts."
She added,"If the SIT verdict on Narendra Modi’s role in the Gujarat encounters is to be held as the final word, by virtue of it being monitored by the apex court, it is baffling then that Narendra Modi who promised clean and transparent governance to this country and setting up fast track courts to look into cases of criminal charges against politicians has turned a blind eye to Shah’s criminal past."
IH could not understand how this signifies Amit Shah's involvement or culpability in the crime, unless proved by the court in the pending cases, and how Modi should be demanded and justified to hang a person without waiting for the final verdict still to be given by the judges.
Is it the journalist personal hate on Modi or eagerness to offer support to Congress led "spread on vendetta" ,that manged to run its course for more than a decade ?
The journalist must have worked hard to come to this stage of conclusion, and she must continue her criminal journalism with extra vigour in picking the beans in the recent case in the state of UP, where the prized weapon of Congress, the CBI has submitted the report on DSP murder case and it was rejected by the Supreme Court as the CBI failed investigate cleanly and avoided to charge Raja Bhaiya for his involvement in the murder.
What does this proves, CBI's negligence or the political conspiracy to protect friends and trap the opponents ? Hope Rana Ayyub will soon find it out.
IH hopes, the investigative journalism by persons like Rana Ayyub should grow only in transparent fashion and must remain away from political or communal populism.
Yes, truthfully she admired herself as the one who "exposed" Shah's role in the encounter, while denying the role of vast pool of CBI officers, who acted under the guidance of Supreme Court of India.
It may be in line with many of the cases filed against Modi by the UPA government and fought by Narendra Modi as CM, for Gujarat riots of 2002 at high court, through SIT investigations and under the Supreme Court.The SIT has only recently declared Modi clear of the charges on his involvement.
Madam Rana ran one step fast in concluding the fact of "not acceptance of the nomination of Gopal Subramaniam" as a Supreme court judge,only as because he was also the amicus curiae in the Sohrabuddin fake encounter case.
More astonishing is her approach on the status of various governors, when she concluded in her words that, "Ever since the Prime Minister assumed office, ex-CBI directors including Ashwini Kumar and AP Singh who were at the helm of affairs in the CBI during the investigation of the encounters, find themselves being at the receiving end of Shah's wrath. While Kumar has stepped down as governor of Nagaland, AP Singh is reportedly under pressure to step down as member of the UPSC after the Income Tax department served notices to him and his family members in an investigation into alleged tax evasion by meat exporter Moin Qureshi".
This conclusion by the journalist has exposed her bias, who alike the Congress party remained indulged in one point goal to trap Narendra Modi some how, be it fake encounters, involvement in riots, snooping or even falsification of his martial status, and now blamed for the intimidation's.
But alike Congress, none should forget that in a democracy people are the best and supreme judge, and they have given their verdict loud and clear. And alike Modi, Amit Shah has also been overwhelmingly accepted by people of UP, by giving BJP huge mandate of 73 out of 80 seats.
INDIA HONEST assumes that the famous journalist Rana Ayyub must have drew the inspiration to investigate the case because of one fact that Amit Shah was targeted and charged for the fake encounter (by Congress party appointed CBI and other investigation agencies),and one important fact that only this case was selected out of ten thousand encounters, that took place in India in last decade, when she wrote, "One could have well debated the merits of the CBI charge sheet and read political motives but for the fact that the Supreme court itself gave CBI the sanction to arrest Shah at the same time, coming down harshly on the Gujarat state police investigation led by the then top cop Geeta Johri for going slow and misleading the courts."
She added,"If the SIT verdict on Narendra Modi’s role in the Gujarat encounters is to be held as the final word, by virtue of it being monitored by the apex court, it is baffling then that Narendra Modi who promised clean and transparent governance to this country and setting up fast track courts to look into cases of criminal charges against politicians has turned a blind eye to Shah’s criminal past."
IH could not understand how this signifies Amit Shah's involvement or culpability in the crime, unless proved by the court in the pending cases, and how Modi should be demanded and justified to hang a person without waiting for the final verdict still to be given by the judges.
Is it the journalist personal hate on Modi or eagerness to offer support to Congress led "spread on vendetta" ,that manged to run its course for more than a decade ?
What does this proves, CBI's negligence or the political conspiracy to protect friends and trap the opponents ? Hope Rana Ayyub will soon find it out.
IH hopes, the investigative journalism by persons like Rana Ayyub should grow only in transparent fashion and must remain away from political or communal populism.