[caption id="attachment_109537" align="aligncenter" width="700"]
Suspended IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt, who had taken on the Gujarat government headed by Narendra Modi over the 2002 post-Godhra riots, was on Wednesday sacked on the ground of "unauthorised absence" from service, an action which he said came after a "sham inquiry".
"Yes, it is true that my services have been terminated. This was expected. They have been conducting a completely ex-parte inquiry. I got the letter (sack order) from them (the
Home ministry)," Bhatt said.
[fb_pe url="https://www.facebook.com/sanjivbhattips/posts/10207455017914800?pnref=story" bottom="30"]
Gujarat Chief Secretary G R Aloria confirmed the development. "Services of Sanjiv Bhatt have been terminated," he said.
Bhatt said he was sacked on the basis of "a sham inquiry" with regard to his "unauthorised absence" from service when he had come to Ahmedabad to depose before the SIT probing the 2002 riots.
"They (government) have been conducting a sham inquiry... an ex-parte inquiry about unauthorised absence from duty," Bhatt said.
When asked if he will challenge his sacking, Bhatt said he did not want to impose himself on the government.
"A lot can be done (against the move) but whether it is worth challenging....Government does not want me, why I should be so keen that I want to remain in this," Bhatt said.
"I had joined the police with a passion, now it seems the country and this government does not need me. So whatever has happened is good. I cannot impose myself on the
Bhatt, a 1988 batch IPS officer, was under suspension since 2011 for unauthorised absence from service.
He had alleged in an affidavit in the Supreme Court that Narendra Modi, then the Chief Minister, instructed the top police officers to allow the Hindus "to vent out their anger"
after the train-burning incident at Godhra in February 2002.
Bhatt had claimed that he had attended a meeting in this regard on February 27, 2002 at Modi's residence in Gandhinagar.
Bhatt's wife Shweta Bhatt had unsuccessfully contested against Modi when he was the Chief Minister in the 2012 assembly elections.
Recently, the Gujarat government issued Bhatt a show-cause notice over a video purportedly showing him with a woman. It sought his explanation for allegedly having extra-marital relationship; Bhatt denied that the man in the video was him.
Along with the notice served to Bhatt by the Gujarat Home department on August 14, it is learnt that the video CD has also been sent to him. Bhatt, a 1988 batch IPS officer, has
been under suspension since 2011.
The notice mentioned that the alleged clip has been examined by Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) under the state Directorate of Forensic Science (DFS), which said in its
report that the CD is authentic and no tampering has been done.
On receiving the notice along with CD, Bhatt sent his written reply on August 15 in which he stated that the person in the CD is not him.
ALSO READ: Gujarat Riots: SIT Opposes Zakia Jafri’s Demand For Further Probe
"I sent my reply to the Home Department on August 15. I told them that the person in the video is not me, but someone who bears a general resemblance to me," said Bhatt.
He further clarified in his reply that "closer examination reveals striking differences in facial features, including the shape and size of the nose, forehead and ears...there are many other significant differences in the body shape, structure, body hair, balding pattern, shape of fingers, etc."
He also raised questions on the FSL findings, which the Home Department cited in the notice served to him.
"It is apparent that the results of FSL examination, suggesting positive identity between me and the person in the said video clipping, are based on grossly insufficient comparison data," Bhatt replied.
He further requested a detailed and scientific examination to dispel any doubts.
ALSO READ: Supreme Court Gives 3 Months To Wind Up Proceedings In Gujarat Riots Case
"In order to dispel any doubts, I am willing to submit myself to Detailed Biometric Examination and Analysis at the DFS of any other facility...so as to facilitate proper and
conclusive comparison between me and the person in the said video," he said in his reply to the Home Department.