TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI: (

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW :

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW :

RVS MANI:

TIMES NOW:

Exclusive: Startling revelations by RVS Mani on Ishrat probe

NEW DELHI: Yet another former bureaucrat has come out and hinted that the changes in the Ishrat Jahan affidavit was made at the political level by the then UPA government.The UPA government had submitted two affidavits in the case . The first affidavit said that the four people including Ishrat, who were killed in an alleged fake encounter, were terrorists. While in the second affidavit filed within two months the government made a complete U-turn and said that there was no conclusive evidence to say they were terrorists.RVS Mani, former under secretary (Internal Security) in the Union home ministry, the man who signed the two affidavits in the Ishrat case, has claimed that he was used as a rubber stamp by the government.Stating that the evidence in Ishrat case was engineered, the former bureaucrat said that he was ordered to sign on the second affidavit and hinted that the SIT wanted him to implicate the Gujarat Intelligence Bureau officersIn an interview to Times Now, RVS Mani has alleged that he was tortured by SIT chief Satish Verma."The SIT chief burnt me with cigarette stubs. I was chased by a CBI officer," the former bureaucrat said in the interview.Here's the transcript of RVS Mani's interview with Prema Sridevi of Times Now.RVS Mani, former under secretary (Internal Security) in the ministry of home affairs is joining us. Thank you, Sir for talking to TIMES NOW. Now, two affidavits were filed when you were the under secretary in the MHA in the Ishrat Jahan case . One was filed on August 6, 2009 and the second affidavit was a little contradictory and it was filed on September 30, 2009. In the first affidavit you have gone on to say that these people, these four people were terrorists. But in the second affidavit you have gone on to completely contradict this stand and you have said that there is no conclusive evidence to prove that these people were terrorists. Now, I just wanted to know who drafted the first affidavit.I drafted it under the guidance of my officers.The first affidavit was drafted by you?(nods)And you completely believed in the first affidavit?I own it because it was based on available facts, there is no rocket science in it. All the information available in the files were coherently put in a sequence. That's the first affidavit.So you signed the first affidavit?I got the approval from the then honourable home minister. And I remember the file having gone to the law secretary for vetting. So I do not know in what context it went. But it went to law secretary also, minister of home also had signed the noting portion approving it. Thereafter only it was signed, filed.So you completely believed it when you said that these people were terrorists. You had a firm belief in that fact?Madam, we don't believe ... We believe on documents and papers on record.So you are saying that you had drafted the first affidavit and you had signed the first affidavit. Now, I want to know who drafted the second affidavit. Did you draft the second affidavit?No madam.Did you sign the second affidavit?I was given an order to go and file it, so I signed it.Now, these revelations are really shocking. You are trying to say that the first affidavit was drafted by you, signed by you, you believed in the first affidavit, but the second affidavit was not drafted by you, but you were given orders and you had to sign it?Yes madam, I had to sign it, that's all. Somebody said you go and file it that is the order of the government, so I went and signed it.Now, who drafted the second affidavit?Madam, it was not drafted at my level. It was not drafted at my level, two immediate seniors did not draft it as far as I remember. If it has been drafted above that, you better find it out.Was it drafted at a political level?smiles) Madam, I....Because that is what the former home secretary also said that the decision was taken at a political level.Madam the home secretary is the highest serving officer in the home ministry. There is no officer senior to him in the ministry. So if, up to his level if it has not been drafted, then you can draw the conclusion that it was someone above him.So, will I be wrong if I say that second affidavit was drafted by the then home minister or by his office?I don't know ...Or was it dictated by the home minister? Will I be wrong if I say that?Madam, home secretary is the highest officer in the ministry. There is no officer senior to the home secretary.Who is above the home secretary, obviously the home minister.Home minister. So naturally the level is very easily drawn. To arrive at conclusion you can put two plus two together. I can't say anything.There was political pressure on you?Madam, I was asked to go and file it, so I went and filed it. It was an order for me. The conduct rules for us is very clear that if I am ordered something, I have to go and execute it. Rule 3 of the CCS conduct rules is very clear about it. I cannot refuse. (smiles)Now when I asked you about the first affidavit and you said that you completely believed in that first affidavit and when it came to the second affidavit, even when you were signing on that paper did you really believe what it said?Madam, on facts nothing was repudiated. None of the facts written in the first affidavit has been contradicted or repudiated. What it says is these facts are there but it is based on intelligence inputs which are not of evidentiary value. It is only intelligence input, it is indicative. That is what more or less, I remember, I don't remember the exact text, it is almost seven years. So that is the reason so far enough. See none of the facts were repudiated.But were these people terrorists? Were you convinced that these four people were terrorists?Madam, I believe in the input of the intelligence bureau. I have received the intelligence bureau's input, R&AW's input for five long years. Every time I found them to be precise, exact, accurate. In fact I have said so in the NK Ameen case in the Supreme Court, my affidavit captures about these intelligence inputs. They are doing a wonderful job.What about Rajendra Kumar?Madam personally I don't know him. I had one or two official meetings with him. At the same time the inputs coming from his division were absolutely accurate. There are a lot of very very sensitive inputs that I have received. In fact I felt very aghast that he was treated like this. He should have been given some Padma Shri or Kirti Chakra or something. You know this is my personal view. I don't hold any brief for anybody.Why do you say that? Why do you really trust him?Madam.Can you give us any examples, anything in the past that has happened, maybe any input that he has given, he has sent it to you and you probably found that this was probably actionable evidence or input.Madam, see peole talk about the incidents which have happened, poeple never talk about the incidents which have been prevented based on inputs. It is a very surprising thing. See, Rajendra Kumar or Ashok Prashant or now DP Sinha who has become the information commissioner. They have given inputs. On law and order, DP Sinha was there, Prashat was there on counterterrorism, Rajendra Kumar was I think Pakistan. See, the amount of information they have given and on which we have diseminated to the states, the amounts of mishaps that we have prevented.Like what are the mishaps you are talking about? Is it the UP case? Can you just give us some information?Madam, it is a matter of public record. I have already said so. Even high court took cognizance of that and I already said so, so it is all a matter of public record. See, until now several incidents have been prevented madam. There are a lot of incidents that I can't talk about now.Based on the information and input which Rajendra Kumar's desk had given you?Yes, lot of them.So you totally believed it when he said that these people are LeT terrorists?Madam, there is no reason not to believe them. There is no reason, because over a period of five years of experience in the same desk ... So many inputs have been revealed, so many mishaps have been prevented.Then sir, what was the need for the second affidavit?Madam, you ask the people who gave me the orders. I cannot say why there was a need for....So, definitely what the former home secretary GK Pillai said that there was political interference. You completely agree with that?Perfectly okay madam. I don't know, I will not like to comment on that because he was the highest serving officer and if he says that he did not draft the first affidavit then it is a question of putting two plus two together on whatever the second affidavit was. The decision was taken and the drafting was done known best to them.What about the CBI investigation into this entire case? There were certain officers especially I remember reading an affidavit filed by you, where you say that the then SIT chief Satish Verma had tortured you and the CBI officers were trying to torture you because they wanted you to name Rajendra Kumar and the other IB officers. Please tell us what really happened. What you went through at that point of time?Madam, had it not happened, my parents would be alive today. Both my parents, their age was cut short by two-three years and that's a different matter. I was chased.By whom?So many officers, so many people chased me everywhere.You mean to say Satish Verma?Madam, Satish Verma what he has done to me is very unprecedented and he was actually, basically the SIT, if you see the progress of the SIT, apart from Satish Verma there was no other joint commissioner or IG level officer who continued in it for more than six months because this fellow would fight with them and drive them out, this is by his own admission and number two is that he was basically not collecting evidence, he was engineering evidence.So you mean to say CBI and Satish Verma everybody was involved in this?I don't know if they were involved in what.CBI was also engineering eveidence?Madam Satish Verma was head of the unit of SIT and he was helped by two three cronies who were all engineering evidences. That's what I can say.You opted for VRS. Why did you do that?Because at one point of time, I thought I won't be able to continue at this stage. The way so many cases were opened, baseless cases were opened against me. See basically I will tell you, the government wanted the chargesheet to be filed, which is an elaborate process. Even to withdraw the chargesheet it takes around 8 to 10 months.You mean to say that the Congress led UPA government was hounding you?Madam, these conclusions are obvious madam, what to say. Conclusions are very clear. You can always draw your conclusions. Actually I go to a particular temple, see. These people talk about right to worship. Right from childhood I have been going to a very prominent temple in Delhi, a south Indian temple. You know one day, one lady officer who had joined CBI at that time, she chased me there. One very senior officer of the CBI entered the temple as a devotee. Thereafter see, my father was a....Why did she chase you?Madam I ran away from there. I don't know why she chased me but it was during those days.When you were being hounded?Yes, and not only that, she had not joined the CBI, she was about to join the CBI something like that. It was a very closed phase at that time. I am not very sure about it. One gentleman came up and said so and so has come. See I am not the panditji of this temple although I was in the attire, I do a particular kind of vedic recitation on Sunday mornings. My father was a top vedic scholar in Delhi. He was very well known and I have also learnt from him. I am also known for my...but that is my second thing. So I was doing that and after I had completed, I was standing at that place. One gentleman approached me saying that so and so person has come. I said that I am not the priest of this temple. Because you know she has come, I said that there are three priests available if you want any help you can talk to them. Again third time he said no so and so. I said, look there are no VIP treatments, everybody, even the high court judges and supreme court judges, they also come to this temple as normal devotees and so there is nothing. He again said no, no, no she wants to talk to you. I said I don't want to talk to anybody. Second time again that gentleman insisted. I could see that lady waiting for me. I said okay, I will change my clothes and come. I went through the staff gate and I went away. Because I was so paranoid with these people chasing me.Who is this officer?Madam, it was one lady officer who had a lot of controversy even while joining and before joing also.Can you name her?No, I don't want to name anybody in this madam.Will I be wrong if I say it was Archana Ramasundram?No, I don't want to name anybody.Because, since you have said that there was a controversy.I don't want to name anybody in this madam. It is a fact. But I already filed....Was I right, I mean?Madam, I have already filed it in the Supreme Court. It's a matter on the record.But we spoke to your wife also and she was very emotional when she told us that you know that your pants were also burnt and...On 21st June, 2013. Yes, Satish Verma burnt me with his cigarettesWhy, what did he really want you to do?Madam you should ask him. Why do you ask me? I kept on saying that I am telling the truth. If Satish Verma wanted something he should be able to answer.Basically, he wanted you to implicate those IB officers? That is what was the basic intention? That's what the CBI wanted from you?The CBI said that the IB input is not believeable. I said I will never do it because I will not tell any lie, I stand for the truth and the truth is I know madam what type of environment they work for, what type of input they generate and to generate that input what type of efforts they have to make, quality inputs. I don't think any other intelligence agency in any other country would do it. Because we have also had certain interactions in other places. I am telling you as a professional I dealt with him for five years and I know IB's level of commitment. I don't hold brief for any of these intelligence agencies.But 2008 Mumbai happened and we lost a lot of people. And 2009, you said that you drafted that affidavit where they said that these people were LeT terrorists and you were sure about that.Right.And within two months, less than two months another affidavit is drafted, which you say was not drafted by you. Isn't it a matter of shame that we lost so many people, so many people died in the Mumbai attacks and yet we had to file that affidavit saying that these people were not. There was no conclusive evidence even when the IB officers vouched for it. And persons like you who drafted the affidavit, you believed in it? But still this political decision was taken. Don't you feel sad that this is happening in this country?Madam, it is the way our West Ministerial system works. But basically I am rest assured that if I am ever posted back in any of the home ministry desks, in any of the sensitive matters, I would still believe the IB because I can vouch for them. The quality of their input I am telling you, it is one of the best intelligence agencies in the world. Their officers are very professional, absolutely professional. I don't know who. See, maybe before joining the home ministry in other places I might have had a different view. But, after having been a user of their inputs, I feel that they are a fantastic bunch of officers. And there are not only these three names there are several other names that I can take. And they are all anonymous. Nobody has interacted with me excepting the meetings and all. But they are doing, not only the IB, the Cabinet secretary and R&AW also, their inputs are also fantastic, they are of the high quality.Both these affidavits were veted by the home minister?Yes. First was also done by that and second was also done by that. And second I don't know what, I only recieved orders to go and file it.In which way was the government then hounding you? You said that chargesheets were being filed against you, what really happened because then you were in a different ministry, right?Madam there also the government was same and incidently the government can extend its arm. I was telling one was this, every third fourth day, one DSP, some DSP from the CBI will come and sit in front of me. In Urban Development there used to be Wednesday, Public day. In the public day this fellow will come at 2pm not allow me to deal with the public. Although mostly I was dealing only with governmnet lands like NBCC projects, Delhi Metro but at certain stages, at certain points of time I was given additional work also. And I used to do so many things, for example, in one case it was MCD, it was chief architect of CPWD. Both of them had recommended it and I had taken a decision on that. Even that was reopened saying that it was a wrong decision although it was a purely professional decision and see that is the way it is.That's why you decided to take VRS?At that time yes, I was very down and I decided to take VRS. See I am also LLM. I am an LLM and I am also a qualified international arbitrator. Not only arbitrator, I am an ADR, Alternate Dispute resolution Specialist. So I felt there was no point in continuing like this. Basically we are very content people. My son is also very well settled. He is a B Tech MBA. He is working for a good company in Chandigarh. He is a auto designer, he is into automobile product designing. My wife is also well settled. If it was a case of financial constraint, I was not constrained. So I thought I'll start my own-- whatever means we can do.Then why did you reverse your decision. Then you decided not to take a VRS. You are still working with the government.I am still working with the government. Some of my seniors counselled me that you should not do it at this stage, just wait. Let the storm blow off and thereafter things will settle. With great difficulty I settled back. My parents also - they were very old that time. Me taking VRS, it was a bigger...They wouldn't have taken kindly to that. Of course, that notice itself, the harassment my mother saw, it accelerated her degeneration. She died in january 2014. So there are those type of personal factors which forced me to...Now please tell us, according to you, was Ishrat Jahan and other 3 people, were they LeT terrorists? What do you think about it?I don't have to think. Ghazaba Times is a JeM mouthpiece. That says then why should I think.That says what?That Ishrat is a martyr. Akbar Ali and Zeeshan Johar are Pakistani nationals. Pranesh Pillai - I've already said so many things in the affidavit including his holding two passports. One in the name of Hindu and one under Muslim name. So these are all ... See, a good citizen of India won't have two passports with different names, with different religious identitiesSo you are more than convinced that these people were terrorists?Madam, I again say that more than my conviction, it is the IB input on which...They had evidence, conclusive evidence?IB input was there. It was very forcibly and their information gathering is very sound, fail safe. Fail Safe. Otherwise the station head would not clear itRight. Thanks a lot.