I was a witness in J Dey’s murder case. How the crime branch jumped the gun on Jigna Vora’s role and fell into Rajan’s trap
After a seven-year-long wait, justice has been served in journalist Jyotirmoy Dey’s murder case with nine people, including gangster Chhota Rajan, being granted life imprisonment. The verdict, which the special Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA) court pronounced on May 2, set former journalist Jigna Vora — an accused in the case — free.
However, the one thing that has left me shocked and continues to bemuse me in the case is how the killing broke an unwritten rule of the way underworld and journalism worked. The rule ensured that while the underworld went ahead spreading its crime base, it never tried to stop journalists from doing their job. Journalists, on the other hand, never interfered in the rivalry between rival gangs. Dey’s murder thus came as a jolt to many because it was a case which saw a gangster ordering the killing of a journalist and another journalist arrested for “instigating and abetting” the crime.
Nobody would have thought until then that Dey’s life could be under threat for reporting about the underworld. Dey’s murder on June 11, 2011, shook the country and journalistic fraternity to the core.
People were clueless about who could have killed Dey and why until Chhota Rajan alias Nana’s men were arrested on June 25 for the crime. In a bizarre development, immediately after the arrest of his men, Rajan started calling journalists from various media houses. As journalists, we always suspected the possibility of the involvement of the underworld in the case.
This is where another “uncodified protocol” was broken. There was a practice that only certain gangsters, or their henchmen, called certain journalists whenever a message had to be conveyed. For instance, Chhota Shakeel would call only certain journalists to convey D Company and don Dawood Ibrahim’s messages. He would not call anyone else. And so was the case with Chhota Rajan.
My involvement in the case
One fine day, a senior crime journalist in my office informed me that Rajan had called him and said that he never wanted to kill Dey. Rajan said that he did not have any rivalry with Dey but was instigated to go for the murder by a journalist — Jigna Vora.
My first question was why did Rajan call our office in Mumbai and not his usual “go-to journalists”? Rajan had never called us before that. This was the first time he had called our office.
The second thought that stuck me was why Rajan mentioned Jigna’s name specifically and repeatedly.
After an editorial meet, we decided not to run Rajan’s side of the story in our coverage of the murder. By then Rajan had already called other media houses and given out the same message. I thought that would end the matter. However, a couple of days later I got a call from a senior officer in the Mumbai crime branch. I was summoned to the crime branch to record my statement on the call that Rajan made to my office.
I told the police that we never ran the phone conversation we had with Rajan and ensured we do not present his side of the story. The police officer in question told me that some of Rajan’s numbers were under surveillance and that certain calls made to journalists from that number were being probed.
While I went to record my statement, there was constant thought bothering me. Rajan had called several media houses and spoken to many journalists that day so why was it that the police were interested in my statement.
I was also informed that under MCOCA, which is very stringent law, any attempt — deliberate or otherwise — to withhold information from the sleuths was considered a grave crime. I was told that many other journalists have already given their statements.
My statement was taken at the Mumbai crime branch’s office, situated inside Mumbai commissioner’s office near Crawford Market.
I repeatedly told officers at the crime branch that we did not play Rajan’s version of the story because we considered it to be an attempt to misguide investigations in the J Dey murder case by deliberately feeding “select information” to journalists covering the story.
A few days later, we received another shock about Jigna Vora’s arrest in the case.
After Vora’s arrest, I was told by officers in the crime branch officers that I should record my statement under section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), which required that the statement be given before a magistrate. I kept telling the police that I had nothing to hide and my statement won’t change even it was given in front of the magistrate.
We again took a call that we won’t give a statement under CrPC section 164. For two months the police persisted that I give in to their demand, for two months I resisted. Finally, they gave up.
Later, a chargesheet was filed in the case. Subsequently, Vora got bail.
In 2015, Rajan was deported from Indonesia. He told CBI that he should not be kept in Mumbai as there is a threat to his life. Since then he has been languishing in Tihar Jail. By this time the trial had begun.
It was now my turn to give a statement in court. Several other journalists had given their statements by then. An interesting part of covering stories about the underworld is that you never get to see gangsters but you get to know some of them through their voice.
I remember an advocate walk up to me in court and ask me if I knew that Rajan was seeing me give my statement. I looked back and saw Rajan attending the trial through video conferencing. He attended most hearings in the case the same way.
Through the trial, I stuck to my stand. Maybe over the years the words used by me would have changed but the essence never did.
All these years, I have not understood why Rajan called us and mentioned Vora’s name leading to her subsequent arrest in the case.
It is possible she had a professional rivalry with J Dey. J Dey was an ace underworld reporter; Vora too was a known and fierce reporter.
Journalists do meet common sources and during those meetings they invariably end up discussing each other with their source. This is how the system has always worked. This is exactly how it continues to work. However, the intention is never to ensure bodily harm to one another, forget about killing a competitor in the fraternity.
That is why I always have a feeling that the crime branch jumped the gun on Vora’s involvement in the case and fell into Rajan’s trap.
Rajan, according to me, was only trying to justify why he had killed a journalist by implicating another journalist because no gangster ever killed a journalist before Dey’s murder. No one has done it since. The court’s decision on Vora’s acquittal seems to have vindicated my belief.
When I look back seven years, I feel happy for not having fallen into a gangster’s trap.