Gujarat cops under Modi, Amit Shah "snooped" on young woman architect even in Karnataka: Gulail tapes reveal
 |
| Click on the image to listen |
Fresh tapes released by an investigative news site, http://gulail.com/ have made further revelations on how Gujarat government under ex-chief minister Narendra Modi had controversially “snooped” on an innocent young Bangalore-based woman architect. It adds, what is new in the fresh set of tapes is, she was being “stalked like a criminal or a terrorist by the anti-terrorist squad and intelligence machinery” beyond the boundaries of the state.
In “exclusive” possession of Gulail and not forming part of the 267 tapes that were seized from Gujarat IPS officer GL Singhal by CBI, Gulail says, these are in addition to its previous expose. To protect the identity of the woman, it has called her Madhuri.
The fresh 39 audio tapes of telephone conversations reveal, says Gulail, that the Gujarat Home Department had contacted the Karnataka government under BS Yedyuruppa in 2009 and sought authorization to intercept the cellphone of Madhuri in whose private life – “her movements and relationships – a Saheb was taking great personal interest.”
The site recalls, “Both Mahduri’s family and BJP leadership have admitted that the Saheb in question was then Gujarat chief minister Narendra Modi.” The whole operation took place under directions of then minister of state for home Amit Shah, who is now all-India BJP president, it contends.
The 39 tapes contain phone conversations between two IPS officers, GL Singhal, who is now a prime accused in the staged-managed killings of Ishrat Jahan, and AK Sharma, then IG of the State Intelligence Bureau. The two cops “made plans to photograph Madhuri’s would-be husband” and “tailed the couple wherever they went: restaurants, ice cream parlours, paan shops and even his residence”, it adds.
Pointing out that this “completely demolishes the claims made by top BJP leaders that Madhuri was being provided security during her visits to Gujarat at the request of her father”, Gulail says, “The new revelations also make irrelevant the commission set up by Gujarat government to look into the allegations as it was an inter-state police operation, with phones both from within and outside Gujarat being illegally tapped in two different states.”
“A shocking picture emerges from the new tapes”, alleges Gulail. “The Gujarat police not only circumvented the process for tapping of phones, some junior officers of the state home department directly ordered the telecom companies to carry out illegal surveillance. This was done in clear violation of Indian Telegraph Rule 419 (A) and the Gujarat government’s own notification (March 29, 1997), which states that a phone can be tapped only with the written authorization of the Union Home Secretary or State Home Secretary.”
It adds, “At least in once instance, the Karnataka government turned down the Gujarat government’s request on the grounds that the due procedure was not being followed and that the order had been signed by a junior officer who was not even authorized to issue phone-tapping instructions.”
“The information obtained was all about Madhuri’s private life, and it was then relayed to ‘Saheb’. It was just not Madhuri, but her would-be husband, whom she was dating at the time, her friends, brother and parents were all kept under a close watch through physical and telephonic surveillance, which went on for at least two months, if not more”, the site says.
Earlier, the BJP had dismissed the expose, claiming that the surveillance-cum-phone tapping was entirely legal and done at the request of Madhuri’s father. As a damage-control exercise, the BJP office circulated an undated letter signed by Madhuri’s father Pranlal Soni, claiming that he had personally requested Modi to “look after” Madhuri.
“But the new tapes prove beyond doubt that the sole purpose of this surveillance was to stalk Madhuri, and not to protect her”, Gulail says, adding, “The BJP’s claim that the exercise was done to ‘protect’ doesn’t hold water either.”, as it runs contrary to “Section 5(2) of the Indian Telegraph Act and several Supreme Court judgments”, which allow phone tapping “only in the event of the occurrence of a public emergency or in the interest of public safety.”
“A shocking picture emerges from the new tapes”, alleges Gulail. “The Gujarat police not only circumvented the process for tapping of phones, some junior officers of the state home department directly ordered the telecom companies to carry out illegal surveillance. This was done in clear violation of Indian Telegraph Rule 419 (A) and the Gujarat government’s own notification (March 29, 1997), which states that a phone can be tapped only with the written authorization of the Union Home Secretary or State Home Secretary.”
It adds, “At least in once instance, the Karnataka government turned down the Gujarat government’s request on the grounds that the due procedure was not being followed and that the order had been signed by a junior officer who was not even authorized to issue phone-tapping instructions.”
“The information obtained was all about Madhuri’s private life, and it was then relayed to ‘Saheb’. It was just not Madhuri, but her would-be husband, whom she was dating at the time, her friends, brother and parents were all kept under a close watch through physical and telephonic surveillance, which went on for at least two months, if not more”, the site says.
Earlier, the BJP had dismissed the expose, claiming that the surveillance-cum-phone tapping was entirely legal and done at the request of Madhuri’s father. As a damage-control exercise, the BJP office circulated an undated letter signed by Madhuri’s father Pranlal Soni, claiming that he had personally requested Modi to “look after” Madhuri.
“But the new tapes prove beyond doubt that the sole purpose of this surveillance was to stalk Madhuri, and not to protect her”, Gulail says, adding, “The BJP’s claim that the exercise was done to ‘protect’ doesn’t hold water either.”, as it runs contrary to “Section 5(2) of the Indian Telegraph Act and several Supreme Court judgments”, which allow phone tapping “only in the event of the occurrence of a public emergency or in the interest of public safety.”
Comments