By TwoCircles.net Staff Reporter,
Mumbai: Gujarat’s 1992 batch IPS officer Rahul Sharma, who had exposed complicity of the Narendra Modi administration in the 2002 Gujarat riots, has sought voluntary retirement from the service citing personal reasons.
According to the rules, an IPS officer can seek early retirement after crossing age of 50 by giving a notice of three months. Sharma decided to quit as he crossed 50 recently. Now it is up to the state government to accept his request.
File photo – Rahul Sharma
“I have sought retirement from my services due to personal reasons and gave the notice on November 19,” Sharma, who is currently posted as Deputy Inspector General (DIG) of Armed Units at Vadodara, told PTI.
On questioning if state government’s revengeful actions towards him due to exposing Modi government’s complicity before the riot panel instigated his decision of voluntary retirement, he said, “I am not taking it (state’s action) in negative way. It does not make any difference to me of what state government has been doing. My decision has not been inspired with state government’s action.”
“I do not see state’s action in that way. I have many other opportunities also. I can be employed in a better way,” he added.
Sharma, a Bachelor of Technology degree holder – Electrical Engineering – from the prestigious Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur (IIT-K) in 1987, also has a degree in law.
As reported, he had sought transfer to Gandhinagar or Ahmedabad after his wife expired recently but was denied. He had submitted to the Nanavati-Shah commission copies of a CD containing mobile phone data that had helped indict some important persons as accused in the riot cases, including Mayaben Kodnani, Minister of State and Jaideep Patel, Secretary, VHP.
Sharma is remembered for his bravery in saving the lives of 400 Madrasa children in Bhavnagar during the communal riots of Gujarat of 2002. When the riots broke out on February 28 that year, Sharma was the Superintendent of Police (SP) in Bhavnagar district. He became widely known as one of the few district police chiefs to have “responded vigorously” to control the violence.
Sharma submitted CD call records to riot panel
After the riots, he was asked to assist the Crime Branch of Ahmedabad in investigating the Gulberg Society and Naroda Patiya cases. Noting the allegations of complicity by police officers and political leaders in the riots, he suggested that their mobile phone records be examined to ascertain their movements. The Crime Branch chief, PP Pandey, asked Sharma to process the data himself since it was his idea, which required him to copy the data onto his home computer. Before he could complete the processing, Sharma was transferred out of his post again, in early July. He said that he handed over the CDs containing the data to Pandey through a messenger, but they became untraceable afterwards.
Several years later, the government claimed that Sharma did not submit the CDs and charged him with misconduct. Since Sharma had a copy of the data on his home computer, he was able to copy it to CDs and submit it to the Nanavati-Shah commission and the Banerjee Committee in 2004, and the Supreme Court-appointed Special Investigation Team later in 2008. Advocate Mukul Sinha representing Jan Sangharsh Manch asked for a copy of the CD from the Banerjee Committee and received it. This enabled lawyers, activists and victims to cite the data, implicating a number of political leaders and police officers, including Maya Kodnani, Jaideep Patel, Babu Bajrangi, police inspector K K Mysorewala and senior police officers M K Tandon and P B Gondia. Calls were also found to have been exchanged with the then Home Minister Gordhan Zadafia and the Chief Minister’s office in the midst of riots.
State government charge sheeted Sharma to hinder his promotion
Irked by this submission of CD call records to the commission exposing the government and the state police, the government started hindering Sharma’s promotion by issuing show cause notices to him for his alleged misconduct in the service. The state government issued six show cause notices to Sharma last year for various reasons. The government sought explanation for cash awards he issued to his sub-ordinates and personal staff for excellent duty they performed. It also issued show cause notice for the DIG’s spelling mistakes committed in his official communication. The cop was also asked to explain an issue pertaining to certain signatures made by him, which the government believed that he was not entitled to make.
Sharma then moved the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) to quash the charge sheet, which stated that he had misused the CD of crucial call records of 2002 riots. He also challenged the show cause notices before a bench of CAT, alleging that the Gujarat home department officials made adverse remarks in his Annual Confidential Report (ACR), which had prevented his promotion.
He again approached CAT in May 2014 demanding an independent inquiry he alleged harassment by Gujarat government with malafide intention because he performed his duty by pursuing investigation in the right manner in the 2002 riots cases.
As informed by Sharma’s counsel M S Rao to ToI, in one of his applications to the CAT, Sharma had questioned the adverse remarks made by his superiors in his confidential performance reports for last couple of years. His assessors have written that Sharma’s “integrity is doubtful” and his “performance is not good”, against which the officer raised a strong objection. He contended that CAT should interfere in this issue, since there is no point in approaching referral body because it is consisted of the same officials. He also submitted that the issue could be referred to the UPSC only on condition that no Gujarat cadre officer should be part of the proceeding.
However, the CAT in initial hearing granted stay over the show-cause notices but subsequently vacated the stay leading Sharma to approach the Gujarat High Court where the matter is still pending. In his petition before the High Court, Sharma alleged that the state government’s action against him was as an act with malafide intentions.
Meanwhile, Sharma’s batch mates and some juniors too have been promoted. But his promotion – he claims – has been obstructed by the government due to charge sheet against him and also due to his improper performance reports submitted to it by his superiors.