Tweet
MHA elevates indicted CRPF officer to IG post
The Union Home Ministry has promoted controversial IPS officer Nalin Prabhat as Inspector General of the CRPF following which he has been posted as IG (Operations) Chhattisgarh, where during his tenure as CRPF DIG the paramilitary force had suffered the worst ever Naxal attack and lost 76 officers and men at Chintalnar in April 2010.
This was later established as “hurriedly planned” operations against the ultra-Left extremists.
The Union Home Ministry granted the sanction for promotion of Prabhat on June 12. He has been placed at Nagpur to function as IG of anti-Naxal operations for Maharashtra State.
“He is posted as IG (ops) Chhattisgarh and placed at Nagpur to function as IG anti-Naxal operation for Maharashtra State,” said an official CRPF circular dated June 13.
Prabhat has already completed his five-year stint for Central deputation and now been given extension.
The Centre-appointed EN Rammohan committee constituted just after the Chintalnar ambush of April 6, 2010 had indicted then DIG Prabhat for the lapses leading to the humiliating casualties suffered by the paramilitary.
Based on the Rammohan committee report, then Union Home Secretary GK Pillai had in a “top secret” communication to then DG CRPF Vikram Srivastava had held that four officers including Prabhat were prima facie responsible for the “flawed operation launched by Prabhat.” The then Union Home Secretary also advised the DG CRPF to constitute a Court of Inquiry (CoI) at the earliest and punish the guilty officers.
Following Pillai letter dated May 21, 2010, the CRPF constituted a high level inquiry committee headed by Additional Director General and a CRPF cadre officer DC Dey who also indicted Prabhat besides two other CRPF cadre officers for the unfortunate incidents. He had exonerated then IG Rmaesh Chandra who by virtue of his position doing a supervisory role.
Pillai had also mentioned that Prabhat had decided to launch the three-day-night operation nicknamed “Operation Khanjar” and the plan was drawn out from the battalions under him. He did not associate the State police for the operation. He had planned the operation despite intelligence of heightened Naxal activity including their Tactical Counter Offensive Campaign during the period being carried out by the ultras.
Prabhat did not brief the officers involved in the operation about the intelligence inputs as he was not acclimatised to the challenges of the terrain, enormous intelligence inputs and threat perceptions. He had joined as DIG Dantewada only on March 29, 2010 and “rushed” to take decision on the operation on April 1, 2010. Prabhat also failed in coordination with the State police and did not monitor the operation once it was launched on April 4, 2010 and did not take care about the welfare of the men and officials involved in the operation. He also failed to mobilise a chopper available at Jagdalpur to rush reinforcements after he received a message about the encounter at 8 am on April 6, 2010, according to Pillai’s letter.
But the IPS officers who head the paramilitary did not accept Dey’s findings as they apparently did not want an IPS officer to be punished and that too after the findings of a CRPF cadre officer.
The CoI file was then forwarded to an IPS officer on deputation to CRPF and in the rank of Special Director General (SDG) to review the findings who overturned the inquiry report and let off Prabhat but indicted CRPF cadre IG Ramesh Chandra.
Even after contradictory submissions by two senior officers, the CRPF did not feel the need to seek a review by third officer in contravention of norms of basic jurisprudence. Insiders said if the CRPF top brass did not find the findings of the then ADG in order, they should have referred it back to the ADG for rectification if any and not forward it to an IPS officer on deputation to the paramilitary.
Officials also question the motive of the SDG who exonerated the DIG but indicted the IG. They said it is not possible that the Commanding Officer and IG are responsible but the DIG who is in between the two in the command channel is let off without any liability for the lapses.
The Union Home Ministry has promoted controversial IPS officer Nalin Prabhat as Inspector General of the CRPF following which he has been posted as IG (Operations) Chhattisgarh, where during his tenure as CRPF DIG the paramilitary force had suffered the worst ever Naxal attack and lost 76 officers and men at Chintalnar in April 2010.
This was later established as “hurriedly planned” operations against the ultra-Left extremists.
The Union Home Ministry granted the sanction for promotion of Prabhat on June 12. He has been placed at Nagpur to function as IG of anti-Naxal operations for Maharashtra State.
“He is posted as IG (ops) Chhattisgarh and placed at Nagpur to function as IG anti-Naxal operation for Maharashtra State,” said an official CRPF circular dated June 13.
Prabhat has already completed his five-year stint for Central deputation and now been given extension.
The Centre-appointed EN Rammohan committee constituted just after the Chintalnar ambush of April 6, 2010 had indicted then DIG Prabhat for the lapses leading to the humiliating casualties suffered by the paramilitary.
Based on the Rammohan committee report, then Union Home Secretary GK Pillai had in a “top secret” communication to then DG CRPF Vikram Srivastava had held that four officers including Prabhat were prima facie responsible for the “flawed operation launched by Prabhat.” The then Union Home Secretary also advised the DG CRPF to constitute a Court of Inquiry (CoI) at the earliest and punish the guilty officers.
Following Pillai letter dated May 21, 2010, the CRPF constituted a high level inquiry committee headed by Additional Director General and a CRPF cadre officer DC Dey who also indicted Prabhat besides two other CRPF cadre officers for the unfortunate incidents. He had exonerated then IG Rmaesh Chandra who by virtue of his position doing a supervisory role.
Pillai had also mentioned that Prabhat had decided to launch the three-day-night operation nicknamed “Operation Khanjar” and the plan was drawn out from the battalions under him. He did not associate the State police for the operation. He had planned the operation despite intelligence of heightened Naxal activity including their Tactical Counter Offensive Campaign during the period being carried out by the ultras.
Prabhat did not brief the officers involved in the operation about the intelligence inputs as he was not acclimatised to the challenges of the terrain, enormous intelligence inputs and threat perceptions. He had joined as DIG Dantewada only on March 29, 2010 and “rushed” to take decision on the operation on April 1, 2010. Prabhat also failed in coordination with the State police and did not monitor the operation once it was launched on April 4, 2010 and did not take care about the welfare of the men and officials involved in the operation. He also failed to mobilise a chopper available at Jagdalpur to rush reinforcements after he received a message about the encounter at 8 am on April 6, 2010, according to Pillai’s letter.
But the IPS officers who head the paramilitary did not accept Dey’s findings as they apparently did not want an IPS officer to be punished and that too after the findings of a CRPF cadre officer.
The CoI file was then forwarded to an IPS officer on deputation to CRPF and in the rank of Special Director General (SDG) to review the findings who overturned the inquiry report and let off Prabhat but indicted CRPF cadre IG Ramesh Chandra.
Even after contradictory submissions by two senior officers, the CRPF did not feel the need to seek a review by third officer in contravention of norms of basic jurisprudence. Insiders said if the CRPF top brass did not find the findings of the then ADG in order, they should have referred it back to the ADG for rectification if any and not forward it to an IPS officer on deputation to the paramilitary.
Officials also question the motive of the SDG who exonerated the DIG but indicted the IG. They said it is not possible that the Commanding Officer and IG are responsible but the DIG who is in between the two in the command channel is let off without any liability for the lapses.
