Chhattisgarh massacre can’t be pinned on Raman Singh alone
Sandhya Jain
2
![]()
9 May 2013
Embarrassed over revelations that the May 25 Maoist attack that virtually eliminated its top leadership in Chhattisgarh occurred after an inexplicable last minute change in the convoy’s route (suggesting sabotage), the Congress has retaliated by demanding Chief Minister Raman Singh’s resignation. Hoping to unseat the BJP in Chhattisgarh’s polls this year, the Congress wants to pin sole responsibility for the massacre on the State Government.
This strategy fails to factor in the indifference of the Union Home Ministry towards the rising Maoist menace in the country, particularly when Central forces were targetted. In January this year, Maoists in Jharkhand indulged in chilling new acts of terror by planting improvised explosive devices (IEDs) in the bodies of CRPF personnel killed in an encounter in the Latehar forests. (Earlier in April 2010, 76 CRPF personnel were killed in an ambush in Dantewada).
Doctors conducting autopsies on CRPF men at the Rajendra Institute of Medical Sciences, Ranchi, found a 2.5 kilogram unexploded bomb stitched inside the abdomen of constable Babulal Patel. Sixteen persons, including 12 CRPF personnel, died in that encounter. Some bodies with IEDs exploded when villagers tried to recover them, killing four persons. It was later discovered that the marauders had practiced this gruesome form of murder on dogs and goats, whose maimed bodies were found strewn in the forest.
Despite these incidents across States, involving its own personnel, the Union Home Ministry has been inexcusably lax in helping beleaguered States to counter this scourge. It is symptomatic of this mindset that Union Home Minister Sushil Kumar Shinde, on an official visit to the United States (May 19-22), brazenly continued his pre-scheduled week-long holiday despite the massacre, and returned only on May 29.
Amidst murmurs that intra-party rivalry may have a role in the tragedy, we may examine press reports on the incident. The convoy of 25 vehicles was returning from Sukma when, 43 kilometres before Jagdalpur, a landmine exploded, ripping a Bolero carrying party workers apart; their remains were found a few hundred metres away (The Times of India, May 27, 2013).
This forced the SUV with state Congress chief Nand Kumar Patel, his son Dinesh, Congress MLA Kavasi Lakhma and a driver, to stop. As bullets smashed the windows, Lakhma fell out; all four ran for cover in a roadside ditch. As firing continued, veteran Vidya Charan Shukla was hit; Mahendra Karma’s car was also hit and he climbed out and lay flat on the ground. The security guards of all leaders fired back but were heavily outnumbered and soon out of ammunition.
Nand Kumar Patel consulted Lakhma and they decided to surrender. Lakhma rose and revealed his identity and the four occupants of the SUV were marched a short distance away. After 90 minutes, the Maoists separated them, according to Lakhma, taking Patel and his son away (they were found dead later). MLA Lakhma and his driver were told to leave.
On reaching the road, they spotted a journalist and moved towards Darbha police station. En route, they met Mayank Srivastava, SP, Bastar, who was alerted by the first vehicle of the convoy which had escaped unhurt, and was rushing to the spot with a 100-strong force and an anti-landmine vehicle.
Kavasi Lakhma, a loyalist of former Chhattisgarh Chief Minister Ajit Jogi, was a known opponent of Salwa Judum.Dantewada District Collector KR Pisda had even recommended withdrawal of his Y category security, saying he faced no threat. Local police had registered an FIR against Lakhma for alleged extortion of money from government officials, on a complaint from Chitgarh Janpad Panchayat chief executive officer BR Bhagat (The Indian Express, November 13, 2007). Lakma claimed he was falsely accused because he had spoken against the nexus of corrupt officials and Salwa Judum cadres.
Ajit Jogi escaped Saturday’s massacre as he was given a helicopter to travel on account of injuries sustained in a road accident in 2004. His rivals led by VC Shukla were attacked and mostly wiped out.
Umesh Patel, a son of Nand Kumar Patel, is seeking a CBI probe into the incident, suspecting political conspiracy behind the tragedy. He said that as per reports of survivors, the Maoists asked for senior party leaders by name and then killed them, which suggests a political conspiracy.
VC Shukla has long been at loggerheads with Ajit Jogi. Way back in 2003, as State unit chief of the Nationalist Congress Party, Shukla had alleged that Congress president Sonia Gandhi’s “obsession” with Ajit Jogi had led to suffocation in the party at both the Centre and the State (The Hindu, April 19, 2003).
The genesis of the rivalry goes back to Chhattisgarh’s statehood in 2000, when Shukla expected to be made first chief minister as he had led the struggle for the new State and had the support of the majority of MLAs. But on the day of the election of the CLP leader, the Congress president reportedly summoned the observers (Ghulam Nabi Azad and Digvijay Singh) and told them to get Jogi elected. A bitter Shukla left the party saying, “It was absolute duplicity on her part… striving to ensure that Jogi became chief minister. I don't think the Congress president has any regard for the norms in public life”. Shukla played a seminal role in the BJP’s victory in 2003, avenging the insult to his honour.
Jogi and Shukla were further embroiled in politics over the murder of NCP treasurer Ramavtar Jaggi in June 2003; the CBI charged his son, Amit Jogi, as main accused in the murder, but he was acquitted for lack of evidence.
The National Investigating Agency, which has been entrusted with the probe, must identify which local Congress leader got the return route changed at the last minute. It must explain how the Maoists congregated on a route that the convoy was not supposed to take, unless they received a tip-off. The method of communication (cell phone?) needs to be identified.
Above all, NIA must explain why certain leaders were called by name and murdered, and why some were allowed to walk away unmolested even though others in the convoy (including party workers, security personnel and even some passers-by) were butchered in cold blood.
Till then, there is no justification for demanding Raman Singh’s head.
NitiCentral.com, 29 May 2013