Maoist Mahasweta Devi, Medha Patkar and their team of mentally bankrupt ‘pseudo’ intellectuals in collusion with Mamata Banerjee, right reactionaries, imperialists and finance capital have been waging a total war against the Left Front Government led by the CPI (M) in West Bengal.
There is no denying the fact that Dipak Kumar Ghosh, former IAS Officer of West Bengal and now a TMC leader, is one of their most trusted and beloved lieutenants in this battle. The opportunistic gang up between Maoist Mahasweta Devi and Mamata Banerjee-Dipak Kumar Ghosh is not only an irony of fate but also a historical blunder as well as an utter ideological bankruptcy and lack of pragmatism on the part of Mahasweta Devi, Maoists and the perverted intellectuals.
This is the same Dipak Kumar Ghosh who was responsible for the butchery of 8-10 women and children on 25th May, 1967 at Prasadujote in Naxalbari, consequent upon which the present ongoing Naxalbari Movement started.
A letter of Shri Arun Kumar Mukherjee, former Director General of Police, West Bengal under the caption “Putting the record straight” has been published in the “Letters to the Editor” column of “The Statesman” of Kolkata edition on 19-09-2009 in response to an article written by Dipak Kumar Ghosh in the same daily on 27-08-2009.
If anyone goes through this letter, he will certainly come to know how the coward, impotent, sluggish and atrocious Dipak Kumar Ghosh had butchered innocent women and children in Naxalbari on that fateful day for no fault of theirs.
The full text of the letter is mentioned below.
Sir,
This is with reference to the article by Dipak Kumar Ghosh “A monster takes on its creator” (Perspective 27 August). I am writing this letter to correct some of his gross distortion of facts about the Naxalbari movement of 1967, in particular about the period during which I happened to be the Superintendent of Police of Darjeeling district of which the Naxalbari region is part.
Let me correct the first distortion of Mr. Ghosh’s article “…Police Inspector Sonam Wangdi (36) was killed by Naxalite arrows on 24 May 1967. The police operation started the very next day and within a few days, the movement was controlled….” No police operation started on 25 May nor the movement controlled within a few days. What really happened on that day (25 May, 1967) was the most distressing incident during the entire duration of the Naxalbari movement.
On coming across a crowd of agitated villagers consisting mostly of women, children and some men at Prasadujote, on the outskirts of Naxalbari, a panicky SDO (Mr. Ghosh, the writer of the article) ordered repeated police firings as the officer who was in charge of an armed police contingent ~ resulting in the totally avoidable death of nearly 8-10 persons mostly women and children.
On that morning, the divisional commissioner, (Ivan Surita) the deputy commissioner of Darjeeling district (Manamoy Bhattacharya) as also the additional deputy commissioner (land acquisition) and the SDO, Siliguri sub-division (Mr. Ghosh) accompanied me to Naxalbari police station to ease the tension among policemen as a result of the murder of Sonam Wangdi and serious injuries to the officer-in-charge of Naxalbari PS and several others the previous day.
When this party with the SDO returned to Naxalbari police station with details of the casualty, we were outraged and totally shattered because all our efforts during the previous months had been to avoid bloodshed.
On seeing the SDO, the divisional commissioner, Ivan Surita, was about to physically chastise him and so was the otherwise affable deputy commissioner Manamoy Bhattacharya; both of them had to be restrained by me, stating that it would serve no purpose except to add to the existing tension, and more so since we all were within the full view of our subordinate officers in and around the police station.
What followed thereafter has remained a matter of great mortification for me: as a consequence of repeated pleadings of Bhattacharya (DC, Darjeeling district) and Kalyan Biswas (additional DC, estate acquisition, Darjeeling district) I had to agree to send a wireless message to the IGP/DIG, Jalpaiguri Range, and others which deliberately conveyed less than the whole truth about the Prasadujote incident. And all this was done to save the SDO who was otherwise destined to be severely punished.
The second distortion is even more brazen. Mr. Ghosh writes: “At the early stage (of the Naxalbari movement?), the police operations at Naxalbari were directly planned in the control room in Siliguri by the deputy commissioner of Darjeeling and the divisional commissioner of Jalpaiguri in consultation with the SP, Darjeeling, and the DIG, Jalpaiguri Range”.
This is clearly a flight of fancy on the part of Mr. Ghosh because hardly did I see any of them (including the Siliguri SDO) in the control room, not to speak of planning the police operations there.
The third distortion is perhaps a great joke for all those who even had a cursory acquaintance with the unfolding events of May to August, 1967 when the movement was t its peak. Mr. Ghosh claims that after the planning part, the operations “were carried out in the hot and humid field by the SDO and the additional DC…”.
More than me, my esteemed and late friends Manamoy Bhattacharya and Kalyan Biswas would have been both amused and outraged at such bizarre claims of the SDO who was never seen by anybody top set foot outside the precincts of Siliguri town during those troubled days and nights.
Yours, etc.
Arun Prosad Mukherjee,
Kolkata,
There is no denying the fact that Dipak Kumar Ghosh, former IAS Officer of West Bengal and now a TMC leader, is one of their most trusted and beloved lieutenants in this battle. The opportunistic gang up between Maoist Mahasweta Devi and Mamata Banerjee-Dipak Kumar Ghosh is not only an irony of fate but also a historical blunder as well as an utter ideological bankruptcy and lack of pragmatism on the part of Mahasweta Devi, Maoists and the perverted intellectuals.
This is the same Dipak Kumar Ghosh who was responsible for the butchery of 8-10 women and children on 25th May, 1967 at Prasadujote in Naxalbari, consequent upon which the present ongoing Naxalbari Movement started.
A letter of Shri Arun Kumar Mukherjee, former Director General of Police, West Bengal under the caption “Putting the record straight” has been published in the “Letters to the Editor” column of “The Statesman” of Kolkata edition on 19-09-2009 in response to an article written by Dipak Kumar Ghosh in the same daily on 27-08-2009.
If anyone goes through this letter, he will certainly come to know how the coward, impotent, sluggish and atrocious Dipak Kumar Ghosh had butchered innocent women and children in Naxalbari on that fateful day for no fault of theirs.
The full text of the letter is mentioned below.
Sir,
This is with reference to the article by Dipak Kumar Ghosh “A monster takes on its creator” (Perspective 27 August). I am writing this letter to correct some of his gross distortion of facts about the Naxalbari movement of 1967, in particular about the period during which I happened to be the Superintendent of Police of Darjeeling district of which the Naxalbari region is part.
Let me correct the first distortion of Mr. Ghosh’s article “…Police Inspector Sonam Wangdi (36) was killed by Naxalite arrows on 24 May 1967. The police operation started the very next day and within a few days, the movement was controlled….” No police operation started on 25 May nor the movement controlled within a few days. What really happened on that day (25 May, 1967) was the most distressing incident during the entire duration of the Naxalbari movement.
On coming across a crowd of agitated villagers consisting mostly of women, children and some men at Prasadujote, on the outskirts of Naxalbari, a panicky SDO (Mr. Ghosh, the writer of the article) ordered repeated police firings as the officer who was in charge of an armed police contingent ~ resulting in the totally avoidable death of nearly 8-10 persons mostly women and children.
On that morning, the divisional commissioner, (Ivan Surita) the deputy commissioner of Darjeeling district (Manamoy Bhattacharya) as also the additional deputy commissioner (land acquisition) and the SDO, Siliguri sub-division (Mr. Ghosh) accompanied me to Naxalbari police station to ease the tension among policemen as a result of the murder of Sonam Wangdi and serious injuries to the officer-in-charge of Naxalbari PS and several others the previous day.
When this party with the SDO returned to Naxalbari police station with details of the casualty, we were outraged and totally shattered because all our efforts during the previous months had been to avoid bloodshed.
On seeing the SDO, the divisional commissioner, Ivan Surita, was about to physically chastise him and so was the otherwise affable deputy commissioner Manamoy Bhattacharya; both of them had to be restrained by me, stating that it would serve no purpose except to add to the existing tension, and more so since we all were within the full view of our subordinate officers in and around the police station.
What followed thereafter has remained a matter of great mortification for me: as a consequence of repeated pleadings of Bhattacharya (DC, Darjeeling district) and Kalyan Biswas (additional DC, estate acquisition, Darjeeling district) I had to agree to send a wireless message to the IGP/DIG, Jalpaiguri Range, and others which deliberately conveyed less than the whole truth about the Prasadujote incident. And all this was done to save the SDO who was otherwise destined to be severely punished.
The second distortion is even more brazen. Mr. Ghosh writes: “At the early stage (of the Naxalbari movement?), the police operations at Naxalbari were directly planned in the control room in Siliguri by the deputy commissioner of Darjeeling and the divisional commissioner of Jalpaiguri in consultation with the SP, Darjeeling, and the DIG, Jalpaiguri Range”.
This is clearly a flight of fancy on the part of Mr. Ghosh because hardly did I see any of them (including the Siliguri SDO) in the control room, not to speak of planning the police operations there.
The third distortion is perhaps a great joke for all those who even had a cursory acquaintance with the unfolding events of May to August, 1967 when the movement was t its peak. Mr. Ghosh claims that after the planning part, the operations “were carried out in the hot and humid field by the SDO and the additional DC…”.
More than me, my esteemed and late friends Manamoy Bhattacharya and Kalyan Biswas would have been both amused and outraged at such bizarre claims of the SDO who was never seen by anybody top set foot outside the precincts of Siliguri town during those troubled days and nights.
Yours, etc.
Arun Prosad Mukherjee,
Kolkata,
15 September
No comments:
Post a Comment