Rais Khan Pathan Wednesday deposed before the G. T. Nanavati- Akshay Mehta Commission probing the Godhra train carnage and post-Godhra communal riots in Gujarat in 2002.

Rais Khan Pathan, former close associate of the Mumbai-based human rights activist, Teesta Setalvad, on Wednesday deposed before the G. T. Nanavati- Akshay Mehta Commission probing the Godhra train carnage and post-Godhra communal riots in Gujarat in 2002. Mr. Pathan was questioned for over five hours in the gruelling “in-camera” session, where only the two commission members were present. What transpired was not known, but sources close to the commission indicated that the questioning was mostly on Mr. Pathan's allegation that Ms. Setalvad had “fabricated” many of the affidavits of the riot victims and tried to mislead courts and the commission.



A former field coordinator of the Citizens for Justice and Peace in Gujarat, Mr. Pathan was allegedly “removed” from the CJP in January 2008, after he fell out with Ms. Setalvad on various issues.

Identical affidavits

Mr. Pathan recently filed identical affidavits before the special courts, hearing the Naroda Gaam and the Gulberg Society massacre cases, as well as the commission, and requested the judicial authorities to summon him as a witness to help “expose” the alleged misdeeds of Ms. Setalvad. The judge in the Gulberg Society massacre case, B. U. Joshi, had already asked the Supreme Court-appointed Special Investigation Team to look into Mr. Pathan's allegations against Ms. Setalvad.

To find out who was responsible for “manipulating” the affidavits, Mr. Pathan had reportedly requested the commission to direct the cybercrime police to retrieve his e-mail ID which, he alleged, was hacked by Ms. Setalvad. He claimed that he used to receive the “fabricated affidavits” of various witnesses from Ms. Setalvad, of which he took copies and submitted before the courts and commission.

If his original ID was retrieved, it would be clear that the fabricated affidavits came from Ms. Setalvad, he reportedly told the commission. He said he had lodged a complaint with the Ahmedabad Police Commissioner in September about hacking of his e-mail ID.

Demanded action

Mr. Pathan, in his affidavit, demanded “appropriate action” against Ms. Setalvad “for misleading various courts and forcing victims and witnesses of 2002 riots to file false affidavits.” The “false and fabricated affidavits” were prepared by her “with ulterior motives which can lead to prosecution of innocent persons in the ongoing trials.”

Mr. Pathan also alleged that Ms. Setalvad was trying to manipulate witnesses through use of money. As in-charge of CJP operations in Ahmedabad since 2002, he had been responsible for disbursing funds received by the CJP from various agencies for the benefit of the riot victims. But, he claimed, Ms. Setalvad gave priority to the witnesses rather than to the victims in payments. According to his affidavit, Ms. Setalvad paid Rs. 50,000- Rs. 1 lakh per witness, while the victims were paid only Rs. 5,000 each.

Interference in politics

Mr. Pathan also stated in the affidavit how Ms. Setalvad had become a “power centre” because of her strong links with the Congress leadership and how she started interfering in local politics. “During the local elections in 2005, she used to give instructions to me to submit a detailed report regarding the position of Congress.”

He had written to the SIT, clarifying his position following allegations made against him of manipulation of witness affidavits. Claiming that his role was “limited,” he said he used to receive the affidavits from Ms. Setalvad through e-mail, got them signed by witnesses and victims, and notarised before submission to the courts or the commission. He was not authorised to make any change in the fully prepared affidavits. Whenever the victims failed to give specific names of the accused, they were asked to provide names based on enmity with persons in their locality with a view to “fixing them.”

His affidavit said that, on instructions from Ms. Setalvad, he had kept the witnesses in the infamous Best Bakery case in Mariam Apartment in Bhindi Bazar, Mumbai. “These witnesses were allowed neither to go outside nor meet anybody. They were tutored by Teesta in her office.”