Chidambaram changed affidavit in Ishrat encounter killing: Kiren Rijiju

Chidambaram has already accused the Modi government of creating a "fake controversy" over the two affidavits filed in the case

Ishrat Jahan
File Photo of Ishrat Jahan. Pakistani-American terrorist David Headley claimed on Thursday that Ishrat Jahan was an operative of terror outfit Lashkar-e-Taiba. Photo: PTI
Press Trust of India New Delhi
Last Updated : Jun 26 2016 | 9:29 AM IST
Union Minister Kiren Rijiju tonight accused P Chidamabarm of "changing" an affidavit filed in connection with the encounter killing of Ishrat Jahan alleging the former Home Minister had brushed aside the intelligence inputs that suggested that the Mumbra girl had terrorist links.

"When the first affidavit was filed, if the content needs to be changed there must be some basis. There must be some point because of which the need to change the affidavit is required.

"But in this case when Chidambaram has all of a sudden decided to brush aside all the intelligence inputs and a fresh affidavit to be filed giving a clean chit to a terrorist, this is such a serious matter that we can't just throw it away.

"The origin of the change of the affidavit was P Chidamabarm. I have stated earlier also that the Home Minister of India, who is in-charge of the security of this nation, if goes ahead to the extent of giving a clean chit to a terrorist, it is a very serious matter," Rijiju, Union Minister of State for Home, said.

He added "how the Home Minister and the Home Secretary are in so much of divergent position" that there is a de-link of some critical papers, that is to be seen.

"We would like to know if the Law Ministry was really involved that is why the papers, documents which are missing will give us a very critical lead information about all the inferences that we have drawn," he said.

Chidambaram has already accused the Modi government of creating a "fake controversy" over the two affidavits filed in the case.

"The report caused an uproar in Gujarat and elsewhere. The first affidavit was misinterpreted and misused to defend the encounter. It was, therefore, necessary to clarify the first affidavit.

"Hence, a 'further affidavit' was filed on September 29, 2009) clarifying that intelligence inputs 'do not constitute conclusive proof and it is for the state government and the state police to act on such inputs'," he had said.
*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Jun 25 2016 | 11:22 PM IST

Next Story