All language subtitles for India The Modi Question S01E01

This programme contains scenes
which some viewers may find upsetting

My name is Alishan Jafri.

I am a journalist reporting
on hate crimes

and the rise of extreme politics.

India is a state where calls
for genocide against Muslims

are on the rise.

There is a very direct call
to violence

to make India a Hindu nation.

The Prime Minister of this country
should have spoken against it,

but he does not speak up.

CROWD CHANTS

The man of the moment...

..Prime Minister of India.

He is the leader of the world's
biggest democracy.

Narendra Damodardas Modi.

He came to power promising
a new age of prosperity...

..but his rule has been marred
by religious turmoil.

ARCHIVE: There have been
violent protests in opposition

to a new citizenship law
which many see as discriminating

against the nation's
Muslim minority.

Many in India see this law
as anti-Muslim.

Massive pelting, massive pelting
as of now is going on.

This series tells the story

of Narendra Modi's troubled
relationship with India's Muslims.

As a young child, Mr Modi
joined an organisation

which believes that this is
a country of the Hindus.

Could he have done more
to prevent violence

that killed hundreds of Muslims?

We were hearing that those orders
to let all this happen

were coming from the top.

It is obviously a stain
on his reputation.

There's no way out of that.

I'm not agreeing with your analysis.

I'm not agreeing with
your information.

From where you have picked up
this type of garbage, I do not know.

He was cleared of
criminal conspiracy -

a finding upheld by
India's highest court...

Agenda was to destroy
Narendra Modi politically.

The agenda was explicitly political.

..but concerns will not go away.

Questions remained over
Mr Modi's head for a long time,

and they remain over him now.

Narendra Modi has promised
to build a new India,

but what does that mean for
the millions of people

who belong to its largest minority?

This regime wants to disenfranchise
the Muslims

and make India a "Hindu nation".

My name is Imran Dawood.

I live in Yorkshire.

My grandparents are from India.
So is my father.

It was very exciting hearing
the stories from family members

of what India was about,

so it was a great opportunity
to do a trip at the age of 18.

With me was my two uncles,
Shakil and Saeed Dawood,

and my next-door neighbour,
Mohammed Aswat.

We were on our way back
from the Taj Mahal.

It was a long journey.

When we actually entered the state,

I remember the driver
saying, literally,

"We're home now, boys. We're home."

And then we get to a roadblock.

There was cars being stopped
by people chanting Hindu chants.

They were, like, vetting them.

It was very common for people
to decorate their cars' windscreens

with Arabic literature,

so straight away they'd see
the owner is a Muslim.

The car in front gets through
and then it's our turn.

The mob surrounded us,
waving their weapons.

Suddenly, we have an attack.

We're just literally getting out of
the car and running for our lives.

The first person that the mob
attacked and tortured

was the driver.

Then I see Mohammed Aswat
getting blows to his head.

One of the people in the mob -
having a knife in his hand -

is saying to us,
"Pull your pants down.

"We want to see if
you've been circumcised,"

and literally feeling...

..feeling...

..feeling, "Am I going to live?"

I got stabbed, and then
a police vehicle pulls up.

And then as I get in,
I remember Mohammed...unconscious.

And this was before me blacking out.

This is...
That's the last thing I see.

I do not know what happened
to my uncles.

It's...fresh in my mind,
like it happened yesterday.

But, sadly, 20 years on
and nothing's happened.

There's evidence out there
of what has happened

and, clearly, these people
are walking free.

It feels like there's
no justice there.

ARCHIVE: 57 people have died after
a train carrying Hindu activists

was set alight by a group
of Muslims.

The train was carrying thousands
of Hindus who had visited...

The wreckage is horrific,

all the worse for being man-made
and deliberate -

one of the worst acts of
religious hatred India's ever seen.

In some areas,
the grief and anger here

have already erupted into violence.

That's alarming news in a state
where racial hatred

is deeply ingrained.

Jill McGivering, BBC News,
Godhra, Gujarat.

People were saying there had been
a group of people inside -

they were Hindu pilgrims,
including women and children.

Somebody had either locked them in
or kept them inside,

poured petrol in
and set fire to them,

and a lot of people had died.

It was horrific.

People were outraged.

The perception all over Gujarat -
and, in fact, all over India -

was that these Hindu pilgrims

had been targeted by
the Muslim community.

The final death toll was 59.

The cause of the fire was disputed,

but at the time,
Muslims were blamed.

This is in a state which has
a particular history of tensions

between the Hindu majority
and the Muslim minority community.

There have been a history
of communal riots

and of very nasty violence
between the communities.

And the concern was,
something like this happens,

members of the Hindu community
feel angered

that their people
have been targeted,

there might be a big reaction
to that.

The Chief Minister of Gujarat
was Narendra Modi.

He was seen as a rising star,
quite visionary -

a man who got things done,

somebody who was very pro-Hindu,
a very powerful, influential figure.

I got a call from
a foreign diplomat.

She was a diplomat of one of
the foreign Western nations.

So she asked me, "Have you heard
what had happened in Godhra?

"Do you think that this is
going to escalate?"

I just used one word.
I said, "Hugely."

My producer started
to get information

that something was happening
nearby in Ahmedabad.

It was clear from our arrival
that something was very, very wrong.

As we were driving in, we were
seeing plumes of thick black smoke

ahead of us in the centre of town.

There were no emergency services
there. There were no police.

My memories, then, are going into
the centre of Ahmedabad.

There's a quite well-known square -

there's a big area,
there's an arch - and it was...

It was mostly on fire.

I remember a man who was a Hindu
with his hands to his face,

watching his business -
it was a travel agent's - burning.

There were also other people
informing me sometimes

that the areas that were
being targeted belonged to Muslims.

JILL, ARCHIVE: This is exactly
what the authorities hoped

would never happen - the streets
have become a battleground.

The grief and anger
at yesterday's murders

has boiled over into violence,
looting and religious hatred.

JILL: There was this sense of
absolute lawlessness.

It was a free-for-all.

I remember seeing the police here
and there, very, very disengaged.

I didn't see anybody,
from what I remember,

trying to stop the setting fire
to things and the looting.

JILL, ARCHIVE: On the worst day
of the violence,

when murder and looting were
taking place all across the city,

we saw policemen just standing by,
watching what was happening

but doing nothing to try to stop it.

JILL: One of my colleagues
in the team

was having quite regular phone calls
with a contact of his.

It was someone, I understand,
who was high up in the police force,

and they were giving
information to my colleague

that they'd been told,
"Let it happen.

"There will be a reaction to what
happened in Godhra. Let it happen."

And we were hearing that
those orders to let all this happen

were coming from the top.

Did Mr Modi do enough to stop
the violence?

I think that that's something
he has to answer for.

Depending on how you look at it,

he oversaw mass violence
or was not able to stop it.

Questions remained over
Mr Modi's head for a long time,

and they remain over him now.

REPORTER: Did the police under your
command do enough to stop the riots?

Not only enough, but excellent work
they have done.

Excellent work? Excellent work
they have done.

Within 72 hours, we were able
to control such violence.

More than 500 people dead,
most of them innocent civilians,

and you're calling this
"excellent work"?

I'm not happy at what happened.

But what we have done, I'm happy.

Everyone we've spoken to
have said that the police

did absolutely nothing.

This is absolutely false propaganda.
This is not the truth.

As questions grew around
Mr Modi's actions,

attention turned to his past.

DRUMS PLAY

RSS stands for
Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh -

"the Association
of Indian Volunteers".

The RSS is a political organisation.

It believes that this is a country
of the Hindus.

ARCHIVE: The RSS was formed in 1925
to unite Hindu society

and spread Hindu culture.

But the Boy Scout image
is deceptive.

Based on principles
of discipline, patriotism

and unquestioning obedience,
the RSS seeks to establish

the superiority of Hindus
over all other races in India.

RSS took shape in the 1920s,
when, in Europe, we saw a movement

that will result in fascism
in Italy, Nazism in Germany.

They liked the idea of the
supremacy of the race theory,

which was created by
the European fascists,

and also the idea of creating
a common enemy.

For the RSS, the enemy
were the Muslims.

Today, RSS is not anti-Muslim,
but definitely pro-Hindu.

And they believe in the glorious
past of this country

and they believe in the idea
of national reconstruction.

The very core cultural values
of this country,

now they are being called
Hindu value system.

People can have any way of worship,

but if they believe in
that value system,

they are very much part of India.

RSS always recruits children,
very young boys,

because they want to tell them
who they are

when they are still malleable.

To reshape the psyche of the youth
is very important.

So Narendra Modi joined
when he was very young.

After school, he would participate
in the activities

of the young wing of the RSS.
That is how he got attracted.

Gradually, he has climbed
all the ladder of all the posts

of responsibility -
and at a very young age.

Modi is a product of the RSS.

He has learned its politics,
its lifestyle.

He made a mark for himself,

and so he was deputed to
the Bharatiya Janata Party -

or the BJP - which is a political
affiliated organisation of the RSS.

As the violence subsided,
stories began to emerge

about what had happened
to some of the victims.

In this largely Muslim
neighbourhood, more than 100 people

had sought shelter in a house
to escape a Hindu mob.

Imtiyaz Pathan and his family
were among them.

The house belonged to a Muslim
former Congress Party MP -

Ehsan Jafri.

A judge later ruled that Mr Jafri
had provoked the mob

by firing his gun at it.

Imtiyaz survived by hiding upstairs.

The violence only stopped
when the police eventually arrived.

When a senior police officer
arrived at the house that evening,

the victims' corpses
were still smouldering.

REPORTER: There are allegations
that police could have done more

in Ahmedabad today.

There's always scope
for improvement, I concede.

There's always scope
for improvement.

I'm sure...

..we could have done better.

I think I would take it as my
inadequacy, if that is to be said.

The killings would trigger
a long legal battle

that made serious allegations
about the police response

and Mr Modi's role in the violence.

In 2009, Imtiyaz gave evidence
in court

about the alleged phone call
between Mr Modi and Mr Jafri.

Mr Modi denied receiving the call

and an inquiry said there was
no evidence it was made.

Imtiyaz later stood for election
against Mr Modi's political party.

In Britain, the government
was alarmed

by what had happened in Gujarat.

I was very worried about it.

I was taking a great deal
of personal interest

because India is a really important
country with whom we have relations.

We had to handle it very carefully.

What we did was to
establish an inquiry

and have a team go to the Gujarat

and find out for themselves
what had happened.

And they produced
a very thorough report.

The report, sent as a diplomatic
cable and marked "restricted",

has never been published before.

FEMALE VOICE: "Extent of violence
much greater than reported."

"Widespread and systematic rape
of Muslim women."

"Violence", "politically motivated."

"Aim was to purge Muslims
from Hindu areas."

"Their systematic campaign
of violence

"has all the hallmarks
of ethnic cleansing."

This former senior diplomat
was one of the investigators.

He's speaking publicly
for the first time

about what the British
inquiry found.

He's asked to remain anonymous.

At least 2,000 people were
murdered during the violence.

The vast majority were Muslim.

We described it as a pogrom,

a deliberate and
politically driven effort

targeted at the Muslim community.

The violence was widely reported
to have been organised

by an extremist Hindu
nationalist group - the VHP -

who have a relationship
with the RSS.

"The VHP and its allies could not
have inflicted so much damage

"without the climate of impunity
created by the state Government."

"Narendra Modi is
directly responsible."

The report contained
an extraordinary claim.

"Reliable contacts have told us

"Narendra Modi met senior police
officers on the 27th of February

"and ordered them not to intervene
in the rioting.

"Police contacts deny
this meeting happened."

There were pretty credible reports

he had specifically instructed
the police not to intervene.

The police contact who we talked
to consistently denied that,

so we did have conflicting reports
on what his direct role had been,

but we did feel it was clear
there was a culture of impunity

that created the environment
for the violence to take place.

That undoubtedly came from Modi.

"While Modi remains in power,
reconciliation will be impossible."

It was very shocking.

These were very serious claims
that Chief Minister Modi

had played a pretty active part
in pulling back the police

and in tacitly encouraging
the Hindu extremists.

That was a particularly egregious
example of political involvement,

really, to prevent the police
from doing their job,

which was to protect
both communities -

the Hindu and the Muslims.

The options open to us
were fairly limited.

We were never going to break
diplomatic relations with India,

but it is obviously a stain
on his reputation.

There's no way out of that.

CHANTING

The European Union carried out
an investigation

at around the same time.

It reportedly found that ministers
took active part in the violence

and senior police officers
were instructed

not to intervene in the rioting.

They looked upon this in terms
of the...the suffering,

which had happened
to the Muslim community,

and if you look at it in that way,
you're certainly bound to come

to this conclusion that there was...
It was completely one-sided,

and that there was nothing done
on the part of the administration

to seriously check this,
that it was a deliberate,

pre-planned, motivated assault
on Muslims by mobs who were not

restrained is, to my mind,
an exaggeration.

It was unstoppable for anyone.

And as a chief minister,

Modi did all the effort.

And after three days, he was able
to stop with the help of police.

Modi definitely shows contrition.

He even puts in
his resignation to the BJP,

but the BJP reject it.

It was quite a smart thing to do
because, politically, if you offer

the resignation at that particular
juncture and it is turned down,

that's the end of
your resignation drama.

My name is Cedric Prakash.

I'm a Jesuit priest.

My background has been on
human rights, justice and peace.

In Gujarat, human rights workers
set up a citizens' tribunal,

headed by three retired judges,
to investigate the violence.

Father Cedric helped them.

We wanted people from
the government, officials,

to come and depose before
the citizens' tribunal.

It was not easy.
They were frightened.

Their careers were at stake.

On a flight to Delhi,

I happened to be seated
next to a minister

of the Gujarat government.

He belonged to the BJP.

Haren Pandya was responsible
for the home affairs

of the state for several years.

He just very recently relinquished
office when Modi took

over as Chief Minister of the state.

He was telling me, "I know
everything what was happening."

Then I said, "We have the citizens'
tribunal - would you...?"

He said,
"Of course I'll be willing."

He swore us to secrecy.

We tried to do everything possible
in order to protect his identity

because he was big catch.

The tribunal was examining
Mr Modi's role -

including the directions he had
given to the police.

I think Haren Pandya wanted to
explain what had transpired

on the 27th of February,

so he came to my office.

Mr Pandya told the tribunal
he had attended a late night

meeting with Mr Modi and senior
officials, and he claimed Mr Modi

said the police should not interfere
with the Hindu reaction

to what happened at Godhra.

Mr Pandya was very clearly
blaming Modi for the violence.

He felt he was responsible
and he should be brought to book.

That was clear.

This was the real first indication
from within the government

that there was actually
a decision taken.

He is indicating that the chief
minister of the state was party to

a decision where the law and
agencies do not do their work,

let Muslims be attacked.

Mr Pandya wanted to remain
anonymous, but news about his

evidence leaked out, and he resigned
from Mr Modi's government.

Narendra Modi has said he gave
categorical and clear-cut

instructions to maintain peace
and communal harmony at any cost.

So was Haren Pandya lying?

Frankly, I don't know.
I wasn't at the meeting,

so I don't know exactly what it is.

But a chief minister of a state
cannot give a blank cheque

to people to run riot.

Last year, India's Supreme Court
said Mr Pandya's claim was false.

Its findings were based
on an official inquiry

which found Mr Pandya was not
at the meeting.

The inquiry heard that others
who were there disputed his presence

and records showed his government
mobile was several miles away

at the time.

But some questioned the inquiry's
credibility and thoroughness.

For most politicians, allegations
like this would be devastating.

But in the midst of all
the criticism,

Narendra Modi did something
unexpected -

he called an election in Gujarat.

NEWS CORRESPONDENT: This election is
all about one man - Narendra Modi.

To his supporters, he preaches an
extreme form of Hindu nationalism,

offering hope and security
against Muslim extremists.

We're just after the events of 9/11,
which, in many ways,

has legitimised actions against
Muslims across the globe.

This, at the very least, emboldens
what the BJP are doing in Gujarat.

Mr Modi realised that there was
a very strong sentiment of Hindu

victimhood, and he decided
to harness that electorally.

The violence against Muslims
became part of the messaging

that Narendra Modi used
in the election campaign.

It is the violence and how he
reacted to it that has constructed

the persona of Narendra Modi.

UNTRANSLATED

Narendra Modi doesn't tend
to be very media friendly.

You follow what I say?
A little bit, yes.

So for him to agree to do
a sit-down interview with us

felt like a bit of a scoop.

HE CHUCKLES

He struck me as a very charismatic,

very powerful,

quite menacing figure.

So you're now coming up
to elections.

This seems to me to be
a state in turmoil.

We're seeing repeated violence.

We're seeing people living in fear.

What has gone wrong with this
breakdown in law and order here?

I think you have to correct
your information first.

The state is very, very peaceful.

So, the Muslims who would say
that they are still terrified,

they are still frightened to go back
to their homes... I am not...

..they still fear that the people
who murdered their relatives

have not been brought to justice.
What would you say to them?

I'm not agreeing with your analysis.

I'm not agreeing with your
information.

This absolutely misguided
information to you.

From where you have picked up this
type of garbage, I do not know.

Some people have been accusing
your government of not doing enough

to stop this, of not
protecting Muslims even now.

These are also false propaganda
made by our opponents.

And you are also a captive
of this false propaganda.

Can you explain more? Who is
perpetuating this false propaganda?

The information I am reporting
is taken from what I have seen

with my own eyes, both at
the times of the riot and now.

Those who are our opponents.

And the independent reports
that have already

been published
into what has happened?

They have no right to talk
about the internal matter

of any government.

I'm very, very clear in my mind.

If they have done,
they have done wrong.

Some would say it is a human right.

There is a general
international interest.

Please don't try to preach us
the human rights.

We know what the human rights are.

You British should not
preach us human rights.

When you look back over the last
month, you've been the leader

of this state through
a very difficult period.

Do you think there's anything that
you should have done differently?

Yes.

One area where I was very, very big.

And that was how
to handle the media.

SHOUTING AND CHANTING

NEWSREEL: Ecstatic crowds of BJP
supporters started to celebrate

the election win
before it was official.

The architect of victory,
Narendra Modi,

the controversial
Chief Minister of Gujarat.

The more Mr Modi was attacked,
the stronger he became by simply

saying that he was being targeted
only because he was standing

up for the rights of Hindus.

A new repertoire had taken shape.

You polarise your vote, and you get
the majority supporting you.

I just entered a taxi
and suddenly I got a call

from a journalist friend of mine

and she said, "Do you know what
has happened to Haren Pandya?"

She told me that he was...
he was killed.

He's found dead in a car under
very suspicious circumstances.

The entry point of the bullet
wound is at the groin.

There is no blood lying there
where there should have been blood.

There is no way from the position
he was in that he could

have been killed sitting in the car.

Evidence suggests he was killed
elsewhere,

his body put in the car
and placed there.

The death of Haren Pandya
is a mystery -

a well-kept mystery, probably.

There is, to my knowledge,
no serious investigation.

The murder of Haren Pandya
remains one of the big

mysteries, even today.

Mr Pandya was killed in a murder
which has really not

been answered yet.

12 men were jailed in connection
with his murder,

but this verdict was overturned -

the court blaming
a botched investigation.

NEWSREEL: All accused in the Haren
Pandya murder case

have been acquitted.

Haren Pandya was the former home
minister, you might remember,

of Gujarat...

In 2019, India's Supreme Court
upheld the original verdict,

but even some in Mr Modi's
own party have doubts

about the investigation
into Mr Pandya's death.

I knew him personally.

I think the killing of Mr Pandya
was tragic and suspicious,

and the
circumstances explained to me

don't make me believe in it.

I'd like to know
who organised it so well.

It is not some, just a stray, say,
killer or somebody taking revenge...

..but it is well-organised.

I don't think it has
been properly investigated.

He was killed by terrorists
who wanted to kill him

so that the blame could be
apportioned to Narendra Modi.

The investigation was thorough.

It went into every stage
of the Indian judicial process

and culminated in
a Supreme Court judgment.

I think we should leave it at that.

In Yorkshire, the Dawood family
were losing faith that the police

in Gujarat would catch the men
who killed

Saeed, Shakil and Mohammed.

There were some serious doubts
arising in terms of what the Indian

police were doing, because on
the one hand they were saying

that they were doing everything.

On the other hand, we were seeing
no results whatsoever.

In respect to the investigation,

we had no confidence in the Indian
police.

It turned out that the police hadn't
even done basic investigations.

They hadn't gone to the scene
of the crime.

Family members went to the
crime scene themselves and made

a terrible discovery.

They found burnt remains, including
bone fragments, bits of teeth.

It seemed from what everybody
was indicating that those remains

were Saeed and Shakil's.

The police seemed to be putting
up a wall and were completely

disinterested in helping
us get to the truth.

Then there was an unexpected
development.

NEWSREEL: The controversial chief
minister of Gujarat, Narendra Modi,

has arrived in London
on a short visit.

He presides over the state
where as many as 2,000 people

were killed in communal rioting...

I thought this was a great
opportunity for the family

and for the victims for him
to be arrested here in the UK.

The idea was that the family
would go to court and seek

to prosecute Narendra Modi.

We had pages - hundreds
of pages - of reports.

All of them were clear
that this was a massacre.

Most importantly,
that there was state collusion.

And so the chain of command went
all the way to the Chief Minister.

Although the offence took place
in India, it could be prosecuted

in this country.

An Indian diplomat said when news of
the plan leaked, there was panic.

Mr Modi was reportedly urged to
leave Britain on the next plane.

I argued in front of the judge
for Narendra Modi's arrest.

The judge said, "I can see
all the things that you've put

"before me, Mr Kahn, but really

"what I need is the witness
statements."

The evidence that we would
need to prosecute it

would have been somebody
somewhere along the chain of command

saying, "Yes, there was an order

"not to take any action,
allowing this to happen."

Mr Khan says that the evidence
that has emerged since then -

even though it is fiercely
contested - has made him

more convinced of the merits
of his case.

Knowing what we now know, and the
information that we now have,

if we had had that at that time,
I'm pretty sure that a summons

would have been issued
for Modi's arrest.

We were bitterly disappointed
the judge didn't issue the warrant,

but we understood this was going
to be a quite a long campaign

in terms of getting answers
and getting justice and holding

people to account.

Western governments began to take
action against Narendra Modi

over the Gujarat violence.

The UK imposed a diplomatic boycott
and de facto travel ban.

There was essentially a travel
ban imposed on Modi.

I would like to have seen much
stronger action, but I think

we probably did end up doing
as much as we could.

In 2005, the US government formally
revoked a visa for Mr Modi

under a law that targets government
officials responsible for severe

violations of religious freedom.

The US are saying this is not
acceptable.

Mr Modi? Would you like
to speak to the BBC, Mr Modi?

Barred from entering
the United States,

barred from entering
the United Kingdom.

On the international stage,
it makes him somewhat of a pariah.

In 2007, a reporter went undercover
in Gujarat to investigate

what had happened during
the violence.

Posing as a Hindu extremist,

he secretly filmed one of
the killers boasting about the role

he had played.

Babu Bajrangi was accused of leading
a mob that killed around 100 people.

Mr Bajrangi made an extraordinary
claim about Narendra Modi.

He said that when he was arrested
for murder, several months

after the massacre, Mr Modi helped
him get bail by changing the judge.

Mr Bajrangi later claimed
he was reading from a script given

to him by the reporter.

Though a judge ruled the veracity
of the sting was not in dispute.

In 2012, Mr Bajrangi was jailed
for murder.

And he wasn't the only one who made
damaging claims about Mr Modi.

Haresh Bhatt,
a local BJP politician,

said he was at a political meeting
addressed by Mr Modi

shortly after the train burning.

Mr Bhatt later said he told
the reporter an imaginary story.

Mr Modi has said allegations
against him in the recordings

are false and incorrect.

You often find that activists
at the lower level...

..make claims...

..which are, in hindsight,
quite preposterous.

They exaggerate their own
importance.

But pressure was now building
for a new investigation

into the violence.

By the beginning of 2011,
Narendra Modi had run Gujarat

for nearly a decade.

Despite the controversies,
some were now tipping him

for an even bigger job -

India's next Prime Minister.

Modi started to think
about national politics

very early on, projecting
himself as a national leader

It was already clear
that he was headed

on a course which would lead him
to the national state.

But Mr Modi had a problem.

SHOUTING

India's Supreme Court had ordered
a wide-ranging investigation

into the Gujarat violence.

A special investigation team -
or SIT - was examining the Dawood

family murders and allegations
made by Ehsan Jafri's

widow that Mr Modi was part
of a criminal conspiracy that led

to the disorder and killings
across the state.

NEWSREEL: Modi seems to be
unstoppable.

But the ghosts of the past don't
leave him alone.

Grilled for nine hours
on the case in 2010, the stain

on his image remains.

The mandate was to look
into the possibility

that there was a criminal
conspiracy by the government

led by Narendra Modi.

But the criminal conspiracy
is a particular term in law

which requires a very strong
standard of evidence.

For the first time in the history
of independent India, a sitting

chief minister, Narendra Modi,
has been questioned on the role

of his government in mass murders
in connection with the post-Godhra

riots in Gujarat.

I think Mr Modi definitely
was very worried.

The special investigation team
was definitely a very serious

threat to Mr Modi's
political career.

An important witness was the former
head of police intelligence

in Gujarat, RB Sreekumar, who'd made
a string of claims about police

and government failures.

He claimed that, on the night
of the Gujarat train burning,

Mr Modi instructed officials
to allow Hindus

to give vent to their anger.

He claimed Gujarat's police chief
had told him this -

though the chief denied it.

Without Sreekumar, the case
against the Narendra Modi

government would be much weaker

simply because there would
have been no information

from inside the government which
would tell you what was happening.

In that sense, he was a central
figure in this investigation.

Another senior police officer,
Sanjiv Bhatt, gave evidence.

NEWSREEL: The ghost of the Godhra
riots back to haunt Narendra Modi.

This time it's senior police officer
Sanjiv Bhatt who alleges

that Modi was complicit
in the Godhra riots.

In an affidavit filed in the Supreme
Court, Bhatt says that he was

present at the crucial law and order
meeting chaired by Modi.

I know my truth.

I've stated my truth and I have sent
there a note in an affidavit

submitted to the highest court
of the land.

When he started reporting
before the SIT inquiry,

my father stated that
the control room contacted him,

saying that an unofficial
meeting has been called

at the Chief Minister's residence
and that his presence was required.

He said that Narendra Modi ended
up saying that the emotions

were running very high in the Hindus
and it was imperative

that the Hindus be allowed
to vent their anger.

He said that Narendra Modi
had directed the police force

to step down, look the other way.

Mr Modi and other officials at
the meeting said Mr Bhatt did not

attend, but an independent adviser
to the Supreme Court said

there was enough evidence
to consider prosecuting Mr Modi.

This is a prominent legal person
who has reached his own conclusions

about what is there and I think some
of those conclusions needed

to be taken note of.

In major relief for Narendra Modi,

the Supreme Court-appointed rights
panel has found no evidence

against the Gujarat Chief Minister.

The complainant, Zakia Jafri,
had accused Modi of ordering

officials to give rioters
a free hand -

the only complaint that named him.

After three years, the SIT ruled
that Mr Modi would face no charges.

It said RB Sreekumar's account
was hearsay, and Sanjiv Bhatt's

account could not be relied on.

It said claims about
the instructions Mr Modi

had given were not established.

NEWSREEL: So, what next for Modi?

Legal experts say he has not got
a clean chit in the rights -

just that there is no evidence.

But it could...

The ruling did not stop the debate
over what had happened.

The special investigation team
could not succeed, for many,

many different reasons.

The investigation team had to rely
somewhat on the Gujarat police.

Much of the investigation on the
ground is done by police officers,

and among the people
who stand indicted

are the Gujarat police force itself.

The SIT report is really
very superficial.

It doesn't explain how
this pogrom could take place.

So, of course, it underestimates -
I mean, it minimises the roles

of the top leaders,
the chain of command.

To establish criminal conspiracy
in law is often very difficult.

Just because they have arrived
at the conclusion there was no

criminal conspiracy is not
the same as saying the conduct

is above question, that
there were not serious lapses.

That in no way takes away
all the important questions

that still stand
on the 2002 violence.

Yes, there were some people who said
they were at a particular meeting

when others said they were not.

Agenda was to destroy
Narendra Modi politically.

The agenda was explicitly political.

I don't think they were
concerned about Muslim victims,

and these included a section
of the media, these included

journalists, these included NGOs.

I think ultimately at the end
of the day, the SIT findings

didn't implicate Mr Modi.

The SIT gave a clean chit
to Narendra Modi.

We have to have faith on our
institution and we have to put

a full stop on something
and we have to move forward.

CROWD CHEERING

The verdict cleared the way
for Mr Modi to run

for prime minister.

The travel bans were lifted.

Diplomatic relations with the West
were restored.

I don't think that I had any doubt
that Mr Modi

is going to be the next
prime minister.

NEWSREEL: Narendra Modi,
India's next Prime Minister,

riding into Delhi in triumph,

after he won an election landslide
with his promise that good days

are coming for India.

Sanjiv Bhatt was jailed
for life in 2019

over a death-in-custody case
dating back 30 years.

His family insists he's innocent,
and many say his trial was unfair.

The government will try to do
whatever they can to ensure

that my father's voice is not heard.

He is the sole surviving
witness who can tie Narendra Modi

to the carnage of 2002.

No-one has ever been convicted
for the Dawood family murders.

Still feeling very angry,
very frustrated.

It feels like
there's no justice there.

Ehsan Jafri's widow challenged
the findings of the SIT in court.

In June 2022, India's Supreme Court
upheld the findings,

saying there was no larger
conspiracy.

It ruled the testimonies
of Sanjiv Bhatt and RB Sreekumar

were replete with falsehood and said
those involved in abuse of process

need to be in the dock.

Shortly after, Mr Modi's
closest political ally

spoke out about the case.

The police arrested Mr Sreekumar and
a high-profile human-rights worker

who helped Mrs Jafri bring the case.

Sanjiv Bhatt, already in prison, was
named in the police complaint, too.

All three are accused
of fabricating evidence.

20 years on, the Gujarat
violence remains controversial.

None of the people arrested
were sources for our report

and the findings of our
investigation still stand.

2,000 people were murdered
in Gujarat in 2002

in a campaign of violence that
was clearly well organised.

That remains a fact.

Now Mr Modi is in power,

it seems to me that history
is being rewritten.

The Supreme Court gave a judgment
which actually brought the whole

matter to a closure.

The closure was necessary.