In October 2009, Pharos Media Publishing Pvt. Ltd. published a book by SM Mushrif entitled “Who killed Karkare?”. Mushrif retired as the Inspector General of Police, Maharashtra, in 2005, a short time before he was due to officially retire from  the police force. What the back cover of the book says is quite instructive:

“Political violence, or terrorism, by State as well as by non- State actors has a long history in India. The allegation that sections of and individual Indian Muslims indulged in “terrorism” surfaced for the first time with the ascent of the Hindutva forces in mid-1990s and became state policy with the BJP’s coming to power at the Centre. With even “secular” media joining the role as stenographers of security agencies, this became an accepted fact so much so that common Indians and even many Muslims started believing in this false propaganda.

This book, by a former senior police officer, with a distinguished career that included unearthing the Telgi scam, peeps behind the propaganda screen, using material mostly in the public domain as well as his long police experience. It comes out with some startling facts and analysis, the first of its kind, to expose the real actors behind the so-called “Islamic terrorism” in India whose greatest feat was to murder the Maharashtra ATS chief Hemant Karkare who dared to expose these forces and paid with his life for his courage and commitment to truth. While unearthing the conspiracy behind the murder of Karkare, this book takes a hard look at some of the major incidents attributed to “Islamic terrorism” in India and finds them baseless.”

26/11 was actually a ‘Brahmanical’ plot

Essentially the contention of Mushrif is that terrorism in the name of Islam is a fiction, and what we are seeing in Bharat is actually violence being organised by ‘Hindutva forces’. The book also contends that there are what are called Brahminical elements in the nation at various levels, whose objective is to capture state power by any means.

It would seem that various events conspired to expose these ‘Brahminists’ whose plan for domination of Bharat was unravelling. The investigation into the alleged acts of terrorism by Sadhvi Pragya Singh and Lt. Col. Shrikant Purohit was the main point which was in the process of turning the needle of suspicion to these ‘Brahmanical’ forces, and so put an end to their ‘evil’ programme. These investigations were led by Hemant Karkare who, at the time of his death, was the head of the Anti-Terrorist Squad in Maharashtra.

Mushrif contends that the terrorist attack on Mumbai on November 26, 2008, provided the ‘Brahmanical’ forces an opportunity to reverse these events. It would seem that two or three days prior to the attack the intelligence agencies in Maharshtra had specific and actionable information that some organisations in Pakistan had firmed up plans to send terrorist by boat to Mumbai, with the targets being the Taj Mahal Hotel, the Oberoi hotels, the Leopold Café and the Nariman House. Instead of increasing the security to the city, and so thwart the plans of these Paksitani organisations, the ‘Brahmanical’ forces devised a plan to use the opportunity to kill Karkare and so stop the line of investigation that he was pursuing.

Mushrif further contends that these terrorists had no intention of striking at the Chattrapati Shivaji Terminus, one of the main railway stations in Mumbai. The ones who conducted these attacks were individuals provided by the ‘Brahmanical’ forces in the police. It would seem that the ‘Brahmanical’ forces in the police have a stock of such people in their control, who can be unleashed to create mayhem at their beck and call. Through various stratagems, Karkare was enticed to go to Cama Hospital near the railway station, where he was ambushed by the two ‘terrorists’ from the police stock.

After this, according to the plan, these two ‘terrorists’ apparently fled in a car, which was also part of the ‘armoury’ available to the ‘Brahmanical’ forces in the police – Mushrif contends that the statement by the ‘alleged’ owner of the car that it was hijacked is a fake one. The police force waiting at Chowaptty, being part of the ‘Brahmanical’ forces, had information that the car was heading in their direction, and they were instructed to kill one of the two and keep the other alive.  The objective was to provide ‘evidence’ pointing out that the act was actually a part of Islamic terrorism.

In such involved situations, every thing does not happen as planned, and both the ‘terrorists’ were killed. However, there was a contingency plan in place, and a third individual, also from the stock of such people, was provided to take the place of the person who was to survive.

As conspiracy theories go, this must surely take the cake. That the ‘Brahmanical’ forces in the police can come out with such an elaborate plan in a matter of two days would make these people highly innovative. Furthermore, in ordinary circumstances, the ‘revelation’ that the police have people in stock to undertake such activities must be seen as a source of deep worry for a civilised society which claims to have a vibrant democracy.

What if Mushrif is right?

What I would like to deal in this note is not to evaluate the ‘startling facts and analysis’ provided by Mushrif, but the implications that would automatically follow if Mushrif is right.

First, Mohammed Ajmal Kasab was innocent, and that it was incumbent on his defence lawyer to present the book in the court. This book was in print before Kasab was hanged.  He was not part of the original team of two who created the mayhem at the railway station, nor was he even remotely involved in the killing of Karkare. He was put in place, only by accident – that is the original two were killed, one by design and the other inadvertently. While the attackers at other places in Mumbai that night were from Pakistan, Mushrif claimes that the ones who attacked the railway station were from ‘stock kept by Brahmanical forces’.

Second, the conspiracy of the ‘Brahmanical’ forces should be thourougly investigated. The various members of the ‘civil society’ who forever rant against such ‘Brahmanical’ forces are silent on the issue, given that the book has already been in print, with multiple editions in English and translations in regional languages, including Urdu. Even now it is not too late for the members to take up the cause of Kasab. These members are always on the look out to establish what they call their ‘secular’ credentials, and are in the forefront of projecting themselves as defenders and benefactors of the Muslim community in Bharat.

Thirdly, Pakistan should highlight these ‘startling facts and analysis’ at international forums. It is probably the best ammunition that it has to establish its claimed innocence.

What if Mushrif is wrong?

It would also be interesting to narrate what are the implications if Mushrif is wrong.

First, obviously Mushrif has allowed himself to be a tool in the hands of forces whose interests are inimical to the well-being of our nation.

Second, the role of the publishers in printing all this should also be investigated. The book has been printed in some Bharatiya languages, obviously to try and influence the minds of the Muslims in Bharat, and so increase their alienation. The programme of radicalization of the Muslims is undertaken not just by the clerics, but also by those who call themselves educated, moderate, etc.

Thirdly, the silence of ‘civil society’ has to be investigated. They are forever looking out to create opportunities to condemn various Hindu organisations at the drop of a hat.  Why have they not taken up supposedly explosive information provided by a senior member of the police force?  They can always project that he has authentic inside information.

Mushrif’s book is, in more sense than one, a dynamite. It cannot be allowed to go into obscurity by society, if the institutions that are an integral part of keeping it sane are to function in the way they should. No one can be allowed to mess around with them.

Did you like this article? We’re a non-profit. Make a donation and help pay for our journalism.