Lal Bahadur Shastri could have been murdered, claims his family; demands declassification of files

[Ind4Ever]

Lal Bahadur Shastri could have been murdered, claims his family; demands declassification of filesParikshit Luthra | CNN-IBN 12:12 PM IST Sep 26, 2015

Claiming that there is more to it than what meets the eye, former prime minister Lal Bahadur Shastri's family is demanding that all documents related to his death should be de-classified.





Shastri's son and Congress leader Anil Shastri said blue marks and white spots were found on his father's body which showed signs of foul play. "I personally feel there could have been foul play. Can't say so conclusively, but the negligence is clear, everyone went scot free, no one was punished," he said.





Recalling the past he said, "there was a butler who was arrested and released. My mother wanted to meet him when she went to Tashkent. But she was told he could not be traced."





He also said that it was "very shocking that both his personal physician RN Chugh and personal assistant met with accidents. Both had to depose before inquiry commissions. Coincidence twice is a little improbable."





He added that his personal diary was never found. "His personal diary never came back. He jotted down notes daily in it. It could have mentioned Tashkent agreement. Even the thermos next to him was never brought back. His death could have been from something in the thermos flask," he added.

Another son of the former PM's - Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Sunil Shastri - also said that he has been requesting several former PMs in the past to de-classify files pertaining to his father. Naming a few, he said that he approached former PMs Chandra Shekhar, IK Gujral and Manmohan Singh but he was not given any answers.





Meanwhile, BJP leader Sidharth Nath Singh, who is Lal Bahadur Shastri's grandson said that he is hopeful that Modi will act on his family's request as he respects icons like Shastriji.


Lal Bahadur Shastri could have been murdered, claims his family; demands declassification of files-PNews - IBNLive Mobile


Why there's a Netaji angle to Lal Bahadur Shastri's death
Former PM's family firmly believes that he was murdered.
POLITICS
| 5-minute read | 26-09-2015
ANUJ DHAR

@anujdhar

• 1.70k
  Total Shares

Former Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri's eldest surviving son Anil Shastri has stirred a hornet's nest by demanding an inquiry and declassification of records concerning the controversial death of his father 49 years ago. Shastri has gone public with his family's belief that his father did not die a natural death.

The demand, coming as it does just before Shastri's birth anniversary and disclosure of the West Bengal government dossier on Subhas Bose, is likely to die out unlike previous occasions.

Some twitterati are coming down on Anil, a senior Congress party leader, asking why is he raising the matter at this moment.

The fact of the matter is that the Shastri family has always taken this line. From day one, from the time the former PM's mother saw her son's body, the family suspected poisoning. They demanded autopsy and an inquiry but it was of no avail. The Congress government simply brushed the matter under the carpet.

The issue was revived only in 2009 when this writer filed RTI requests with the prime minister's office (PMO) and the ministry of external affairs.

Believe it or not, the PMO informed me that it possessed one, just one, classified document relating to former prime minister's controversial death. The ministry of external affairs wanted me to believe that its "concerned division" had no information on the subject matter. I disbelieved it because the sudden death of the prime minister must have thrown the Indian embassy in Moscow in a tizzy. Our ambassador in Moscow, TN Kaul, must have scrambled to inform Delhi of the tragedy. A flurry of telephone calls and telegrams over the tragic development would have ensued for weeks. The ministry would have gone on an overdrive to find out the circumstances leading to the prime minister's death. The ambassador must have sent a blow-by-blow report, and he must have done that, after checking the facts with the Russian authorities.

The Soviets, on their part, must have supplied reams of information to remove the last vestige of doubts in India. And as the charges of foul play emerged, our government, especially the Intelligence Bureau (there was no RAW in those days) must have scraped the bottom of the barrel in search for the truth.

So I flatly rejected the line MEA had given me. I was uneasy with their statement that the only main record available with the Indian embassy in Moscow was the report of the joint medical investigation conducted by Shastri's doctor RN Chugh and the Soviet doctors. The ministry confirmed that no post mortem was carried out in Moscow. I also got to know from the Delhi Police through another RTI reply that no post mortem was conducted in India either. Only an autopsy could have completely ruled out the poisoning charges.

In view of my doubts, on July 21, 2009 I filed another application seeking copies of the entire correspondence between the MEA and the embassy, and between the embassy and the Soviet foreign ministry over the issue. And this time, the ministry told me I could be not be supplied the information under Clause 8(1)(a) of the RTI Act, dealing with "information, disclosure of which would prejudicially affect the sovereignty and integrity of India, the security, strategic, scientific or economic interests of the State, relation with foreign State or lead to incitement of an offence".

It was only after the intervention of chief information commissioner Sadananad Mishra that the MEA in August 2011 supplied me copies of Dr Chugh's medical report and a copy of the statement made by the external affairs minister in the Rajya Sabha. The medical report attributed the cause of death to "an acute attack of infarct miocarda (myocardial infarction)".

Now, there are several circumstances on record going against it the official line.

For a start, the Russian butler serving Shastri had been arrested - this fact came to light only decades later. Ahmed Sattarov, the butler, himself told British and later Russia media that a few hours after Shastri died he was woken up by an officer of the Ninth Directorate of the KGB. Suspecting that the Indian PM had been poisoned, the KGB men took Sattarov and others to a dungeon and subject them to a thorough interrogation.

It is not known that whether TN Kaul personal cook placed in the service of the prime minister was also interrogated. It seems from extant records that this cook, Jan Mohammed, was posted in the Rashtrapati Bhavan after he was moved from Moscow. Kaul became India's foreign secretary.

In the last few years I have had occasions to personally discuss the matter with Shastriji's youngest surviving son Sunil and Shastriji's two grandsons, Sanjay Nath Singh and Siddharth Nath Singh. The family firmly believes that PM Shastri was murdered. They also raise suspicions about the fate that befell Dr Chug and other members of Shastri's personal staff.

Then, there is a Netaji angle to the Shastri mystery. There is evidence suggesting that Shastri was not on the same page as Jawaharlal Nehru with regard to the possibility of Subhas Bose remaining alive after his reported death in 1945. It was been claimed that Shastri wanted to settle the Bose case. His family members think that Lal Bahadur Shastri in his last call home from Tashkent had stated about "some good news" he was bringing home.

The Shastri family thinks he was alluding to Subhas Chandra Bose.

(The writer's upcoming book What happened to Netaji? would be released in October.)

#Netaji, #Lal Bahadur Shastri


Why there's a Netaji angle to Lal Bahadur Shastri's death

 

[Ind4Ever]

Lal Bahadur Shastri’s death in Tashkent still raises questions
2 October 2013 ANTON VERESHCHAGIN, SPECIALLY FOR RIR
Today is the 109th birth anniversary of Lal Bahadur Shastri, a man who was considered the epitome of honesty, openness and integrity in the world of politics. The second Indian prime minister died in Tashkent in 1966 and mystery still surrounds his death.
Facebook

Twitter2

LinkedIn
Pinterest
INDIA, USSR
Indian Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri. Source: Yuryi Abramochkin / RIA Novosti
Lal Bahadur Shastri’s untimely demise on account of a heart attack in 1966 in Tashkent was shocking. The strange circumstances of this tragic death, which happened only a few hours after signing the Tashkent Declaration, remain the subject of heated debate, even today, nearly half a century later.

In 2009, Indian journalist Anuj Dhar, known for his investigation of the death of Subhas Chandra Bose, made an unusual request to the Prime Minister of India. Using the country’s new Right to Information Act, he sought the publication of classified information relating to the death of Shastri. Although the request was turned down, the wording of the refusal, which cited raised issues of India’s foreign relations, makes one pause. It is no wonder that such statements cause people to discuss various versions of Shastri's death that are very different from the official one.

The first version appeared immediately after Shastri's death...

On the evening of January 10, 1966 in Tashkent, Shastri and Pakistani President Muhammad Ayub Khan, with the participation of Alexei Kosygin, the Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the USSR had signed a peace declaration that ended the Indo-Pakistan war. The bloody confrontation in Kashmir and neighbouring regions, claiming the lives of nearly 7,000 people, came to an end thanks to reasonable compromise by both leaders and the skilful mediation of the Soviet Union. According to diplomatic traditions, when negotiations come to a successful conclusion, a formal banquet is held. No disaster seemed imminent. And then at night Shastri, who had just a few hours ago achieved peace for his country, died suddenly.

Read section: History
The sad news shocked everyone. The KGB was called in immediately and they placed the head waiters who had served the distinguished guests at the banquet under temporary arrest on suspicion of poisoning the Prime Minister of India. However, the doctor who accompanied the Prime Minister on his trip and the Soviet doctors, having examined the body, came to the conclusion that he died of a heart attack, which was already his fourth. The waiters were released, and the suspicion of the poisoning was said to be groundless.

However, not everyone believed this. Lalita, the wife of Shastri, pointing to strange bluish marks on his body and claiming that he never had any heart problems in the past, said that her husband was indeed poisoned. The tense political situation in which Shastri had worked and the suddenness of his death seemed to speak in favour of this. At the same time, the Indian authorities found no reason for an autopsy. Subsequently, the lack of any documentary evidence, other than the results of the one medical examination, only added fuel to the fire, and increased the number of people that believed in a conspiracy theory.

Who, in their opinion, could have been guilty of the death of a talented prime minister, who bravely and calmly lead the country through a difficult military conflict? People who do not trust the official version have two different theories.

A Pakistani plot?

The first is that the murder of Lal Bahadur Shastri was organized by the Pakistani government. It is believed that the Prime Minister of India intended to continue talks with Ayub Khan after signing the Declaration. The purpose of these negotiations would have been to make the Ayub Khan promise to “never to use force against India,” and to finally renounce all territorial claims in Kashmir. Given India's tacit support from the Soviet Union, as well as several major failures of Pakistan in the war (for example, the battle of Asal Uttar), which demonstrated the weakening of the Pakistani military, Shastri could have counted on his demands being met. And so to prevent such a scenario, the Pakistani authorities staged an attack on the Indian Prime Minister, some believe.

Remembering India’s ‘Iron Lady’

However, that raises a question. Could Ayub Khan have made such a rash decision while in a foreign country, where the risk of failure increased many times? The consequences of a new conflict, which certainly would have started if the conspiracy had been uncovered, were completely unpredictable. Even if the plan had been successfully carried out, it would have been unlikely to assist the Pakistani leadership. Poisoning of a political opponent during negotiations in any case would have made Ayub Khan look suspicious, and probably would have caused an international scandal that would have jeopardised the diplomatic image of Pakistan.

In addition, according to the testimony of one of the head waiters, Ahmed Sattarov, the Soviet secret police carefully observed the preparations for the event: all of the food put on the table underwent laboratory analysis, and the staff was under constant surveillance. Could Pakistani agents really have carried out such a risky plan so easily?

Hand of Moscow

Proponents of the second version see the “hand of Moscow” in the incident. The USSR was allegedly unhappy with Nehru's policy of non-alignment, which Lal Bahadur Shastri consistently adhered to, and intended to bring more loyal forces to power in India. Some radical adherents consider Indira Gandhi, who became prime minister of India after the death of Shastri, to be a “Soviet stooge.” In this way they try to explain why information on the circumstances of the death of the Indian Prime Minister was never disclosed. The participation of the Soviet Union, it would seem, could explain how a political assassination could take place on Soviet territory.

But even a cursory analysis of this version reveals many weaknesses. For example: why would the Soviets change leadership in India if the 1950s saw Indo-Soviet rapprochement (a trade agreement in 1953, Nehru's visit to Moscow in 1955, the consideration of the Soviet Union as an ally in the confrontation with China), which only intensified during Shastri's tenure as Prime Minister?

What Stalin thought of Gandhi and Nehru

Indira Gandhi, who was appointed by Lal Bahadur as Minister of Information and Broadcasting, was by no means his political enemy. On the contrary, among the other leaders of the Congress she supported Shastri when he went up against other politicians such as Morarji Desai. She was also not an ardent supporter of the alliance with the USSR (an explicit pro-Soviet stance can be seen in her politics only beginning in 1968-1969). Clearly, neither the “Soviet” version nor the “Pakistani” one looks very convincing.

So, what is known about the true causes of Lal Bahadur Shastri's death? After examining the most popular conspiracy theories, the official stance seems the most plausible. Hardships endured by Shastri, including the loss of loved ones, repeated periods of incarceration during India’s freedom struggle and the need to act in an extremely tense political situation could have affected the health of this brave man.

However, much of this story remains unclear. Why wasn't an autopsy performed on the body of the Prime Minister? Why are the Indian authorities afraid to publish the details of his death? Why did Shastri's son Sunil stubbornly refuse to believe that his father died of a heart attack? Whether we learn the answers to these questions, only time will tell…

}

Memories of head waiter Ahmed Sattarov

“In January 1966, a meeting was held in Tashkent between the heads of the governments of India and Pakistan, where they discussed ending the conflict between the warring countries. I was among the special group of head waiters from the Kremlin that was sent to work in Tashkent. Preparation took about a month. One of the things that we practiced was how to comply with the rules of etiquette. In this case, it was not easy, as European protocol is very different from Muslim and Hindu. An expensive, elegant set of dishes was made ready, that even included dining sets of the Emir of Bukhara that had been found in the vaults of the Ministry of Commerce of Uzbekistan.

Saga of India-Russia diplomatic ties

After the pact was signed, a buffet-style banquet was held. After it was finished, the entire exhausted staff was called together, thanked, and awarded certificates. They promised me and some other head waiters to give us state awards in Moscow for all of our service. We went back to the hotel very happy.

Early in the morning I was woken by an officer of the Ninth Directorate of the KGB (who guarded members of the Politburo and the government), from whom I learned about the death of Lal Bahadur Shastri. The officer said that they suspected the Indian prime minister had been poisoned. They handcuffed me and three other head waiters, of which I was senior, and loaded us into a Chaika automobile. We four had served the most senior officials, and so we immediately came under suspicion.

They brought us to a small town called Bulmen, which is about thirty kilometres from the city, locked us in the basement of a three-story mansion, and stationed a guard. After a while, they brought the Indian chef who had cooked the Indian dishes for the banquet. We thought that it must have been that man who poisoned Shastri. We were so nervous that the hair on the temple of one of my colleagues turned gray before our eyes, and ever since I stutter.

We spent six hours in the basement; they seemed like an eternity. And finally, the door opened and a delegation led by Kosygin entered. He apologized to us, and said that we were free to go. A medical examination had shown that Shastri died a natural death from his fourth heart attack. Nevertheless, the foreign press dubbed us the ‘Poisoners of the Prime Minister of India.’ Only our country's newspapers showed restraint.”

Sattarov, who has rarely been interviewed since the incident, also answered a couple of questions.

Remembering Nehru’s first ever visit to the USSR

The Ninth Directorate probably tightly controlled the whole banquet, including the quality of the food. Was there really an opportunity for such an attempt?

I think not. The food could not get onto the banquet table or into the refrigerators of the apartments of the heads of state without undergoing a complete laboratory analysis. Every movement of the staff was under the supervision of the KGB and other intelligence agencies.

Did you change your attitude toward the Kremlin after the incident?

Yes, for the better. Kosygin remembered me, said hello on occasion and even shook my hand. My boss also treated me well. But the changes took place in my heart. At that time I had been taking correspondence courses at Moscow State University. The six hours I spent in the basement at Bulmen in handcuffs made me promise myself that when I finished my studies, I would quit my job as head waiter. Soon I found work in a small newspaper. Later I published several books of poetry and essays. When the confidentiality term expired, I even wrote a memoir called Notes of a Kremlin Maitre d'.

 

[dadeechi]

No one knows what really happened but here are some facts to note

1) Until the death of Shastri, India was still non-aligned and he had socialist leanings like Nehru

2) Right wing leader Morarji Desai was at odds with Nehru and was a strong contender for PM's post after Nehru's death but could not become PM

3) Indira Gandhi became PM, defeating Morarji Desai, following Shastri's death in 1965

4) Indira Gandhi abolished privy purses and nationalized all major banks of India in 1969 which resulted in split of congress party with right wing leader Morarji Desai forming Congress (O)

5) Indira signs the Indo-Soviet Treaty of Peace, Friendship and Co-operation in 1971

5) Jayaprakash Narayan supported by western powers started Nav Nirman Andolan and was instrumental in making Morarji Desai the first non-congress PM of India in 1977

Deja Vu:

a) Both Jayaprakash Narayan and Arvind Kejriwal have used anti corruption movements

b) Both Jayaprakash Narayan and Arvind Kejriwal are Magsaysay Award winners

c) Both Jayaprakash Narayan and Arvind Kejriwal ran NGOs

d) Both Morarji Desai and Narendra Modi have politically risen due to their support to Hindus in Godhra

e) Both Indira Gandhi and Sonia Gandhi have made deals with Shahi Imam of Jama Masjid for the support of Indian muslims

f) Both Jayaprakash Narayan and Arvind Kejriwal being socialists have played pivotal role in make right wing leaders Morarji Desai and Narendra Modi as non-congress PMs of India by splitting the socialist votes that traditionally went to congress