English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Rafale deal: Congress launches fresh attack, alleges crony capitalism to favour Reliance

Published

on

Rafale deal

The Congress on Friday came out with a fresh set of papers accusing the Modi government of deceiving the country and saying that Defence Minister Nirmala Sitharaman “misled” the nation on the Rafale fighter aircraft deal.

The Congress focused on award of offset contract to Reliance Defence Ltd and alleged that something was amiss in grant of the contract.

Although the offset contract given to the Dassault Reliance Aerospace Limited – a joint venture between RDL and Dassault – is worth Rs 30,000 crore, the Congress released RIL’s papers which claimed that “a consequent Lifecycle Cost Contract” of Rs 1 lakh crore was also awarded to it.

Congress president Rahul Gandhi tweeted on Friday evening, “Dear Trolls, I apologise for my earlier tweet in which I stated Mr 56’s friend’s JV, received 4 Billion US$’s of “offset” contracts. I forgot to add the 16 Billion US$ RAFALE “lifecycle” contract. 20 BILLION US$, is the actual benefit. So Sorry!! #130000CroreRafaleScam”

AICC communication department head Randeep Surjewala said, “What is surprising is that one of the biggest defence offset contracts went to a company, Reliance Defence Ltd Reliance Defence was incorporated on March 28, 2015, just 12 days before the announcement of purchase of 36 Rafale aircrafts by PM in France on 10th April, 2015. The company Reliance Defence Ltd. did not have the license to manufacture fighter aircrafts at that time.”

Surjewala placed records of the ministry of corporate affairs, RIL’s press releases and company records to make his point that the Modi government had gifted the Anil Ambani-owned company a huge defence contract despite the fact that it neither had any industry experience nor any required assets, said a report in The Wire.

He highlighted a separate contract around the same time of the Rafale deal in which RDL’s sister company, Reliance Aerostructure Ltd benefitted. “Another subsidiary of RIL, Reliance Aerostructure Ltd (RAL), was given the license to manufacture fighter aircraft in 2016 around the same time when RDL got the offset contract in the Rafale deal.”

Surjewala claimed that RAL, which was “given the industrial licence to manufacture fighter aircraft” on February 22, 2016, did not own any land or building when it applied for the licence, reported The Indian Express (IE).

“In its licence application for manufacturing fighter aircraft, Reliance Aerostructure Ltd has given its address and location as ‘Survey No. 589, Taluka Jafrabad, Village Lunsapur, District Amreli, Gujarat’. At that time, these premises were not owned by Reliance Aerostructure. The address belonged to Pipavav Defence and Offshore Engineering Co Ltd,” the Congress leader was quoted by IE as saying.

Surjewala said 2015-16 annual report of the Reliance Group itself says that “acquisition of Pipavav Defence and Offshore Engineering Co. was successfully completed in January 2016.”

“Even on the date of license i.e 22.02.2016, Reliance Aerostructure Ltd. did not own the land or building at the aforesaid address. It was Reliance Defence Ltd. that acquired the company only on 18.01.2016 and name was then changed to Reliance Defence and Engineering Limited,” Surjewala was quoted as saying by The Wire.

He cited the company’s annual report 2015-16, page number 5 to substantiate his allegation. Similarly, he said even RAL was allotted 104 acres in Mihan SEZ, Nagpur, Maharashtra on 28 August 2015 for around Rs 63 crore, which was paid only in July, 2017. “So when the RAL was awarded the license to manufacture fighter aircrafts, it technically had no assets of its own. Is the Modi government serious about our country’s security?”

Surjewala also alleged that there were discrepancies in the Defence Ministry’s statement and the annual report of Dassault Aviation. The defence ministry’s statement issued on February 7, 2018 claimed “no Indian offset partner for the 2016 deal for 36 Rafale aircraft has been selected by the vendor [DA]”

But, the 2016 annual report of Dassault Aviation clearly stated Anil Ambani-led Reliance Group will “manage its offsets provided for in the country by the Make in India initiative”.

The Congress further alleged that on February 16, 2017, a press release from Reliance Defence Ltd., the joint venture partner, put the value of the deal at €7.87 billion, or approximately Rs. 60,000 crore, despite the Modi government claiming it cannot disclose it owing to a secrecy clause.

He also quoted a “investor presentation” slide of Reliance Infrastructure which talks about the joint-venture with Dassault Aviation. It talks about the offset contract worth Rs 30,000 crore, and that “life cycle opportunity (is) estimated at Rs 1 lakh crore over 50 years”.

Targeting defence minister Nirmala Sitharaman, Surjewala said that the ministry of defence had issued a press release on February, 7, 2018, which said, “…no Indian Offset Partner for the 2016 deal for 36 Rafale Aircrafts has been so far selected by the vendor (Dassault Aviation) because as per the applicable guidelines, Dassault Aviation is free to select the Indian Offset Partners and provide their details at the time of seeking offset credits, or one year prior to discharge of offset obligation”.

However, he said that RIL had issued a press release a year earlier on February 16, 2017, to announce that it had secured the offset contract in the Rafale deal. “Even Dassault Aviation in its Annual Report 2016-17 has claimed that ‘offset contract’ is being executed by Reliance.” Surjewala said.

Surjewala asked, “The simple question is, who is lying: the Defence Minister or Reliance/Dassault Aviation?”

He further said that if Dassault was free to choose its offset partner, as the defence ministry claims, it would be a clear violation of guidelines in such matters.

He said that the Defence Offset Contract Guidelines issued by the Defence Offset Management Wing (DOMW) of the Defence Ministry stipulates that all offset proposals will be approved by Defence Minister and approved by the Acquisition Manager. The guidelines, he said, also says the vender will submit six-monthly reports and that an officer of DOMW may conduct an audit to verify the actual status of implementation.

“The defence offset guideline warrant and mandate that every offset contract has to be approved by the Defence Minister. Did she approve it? If she did not approve it, how did she permit Dassault Aviation to handover the contract to a private company superseding a Government company? It only shows that the national interest was being compromised by the Prime Minister and Defence Minister of India,” he said.

The Congress alleged that the Modi government cancelled the UPA government’s deal that mandated government-owned Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. only to suit a private company.

“The culture of crony capitalism is the DNA of the Modi government. It is truer than ever in case of the Rs. 60,145 crore Rafale deal …. Does the Prime Minister represent the interest of private companies and private industrial houses or is his duty and obligation to protect an existing signed contract between an experienced government company,” asked Surjewala.

India News

Mumbai Police book 3 unidentified shooters in Tiger Shroff firing case

Mumbai Police have registered a case against three unidentified individuals in connection with the firing at Tiger Shroff’s car in Mumbai’s Juhu area. The actor escaped without gunshot injuries, while two other people were injured.

Published

on

Mumbai Police have registered a First Information Report (FIR) against three unidentified individuals in connection with the firing incident involving Bollywood actor Tiger Shroff in Mumbai’s Juhu area. The case is under investigation as police work to identify those responsible for the shooting.

The incident took place on Sunday evening, October 18, when unidentified assailants opened fire at the vehicle carrying Shroff. The actor escaped without gunshot injuries, while two other people sustained injuries in the incident.

FIR registered against unidentified suspects

The police case names three unidentified individuals in connection with the firing. Investigators are examining evidence to establish the identities of the suspects and determine the circumstances surrounding the attack.

The registration of the FIR marks a formal step in the investigation. However, the identities of the accused have not been established in the report, and the case remains under investigation.

What happened during the firing incident

The shooting occurred in Mumbai’s Juhu area as Shroff was returning after playing football. The assailants reportedly opened fire at his car before fleeing.

The actor’s driver was among the two people injured in the incident. Police have been investigating the circumstances of the shooting and examining available evidence to trace those involved.

Investigation continues

Mumbai Police are continuing their investigation into the firing. The motive behind the attack and the identities of those responsible remain key questions for investigators.

A claim of responsibility attributed to individuals allegedly associated with the Lawrence Bishnoi gang has also surfaced on social media. However, the alleged gang’s involvement should not be treated as established fact without official confirmation from the police.

Further details are awaited as the investigation progresses.

Continue Reading

India News

Devendra Fadnavis says no one will be spared after firing at Tiger Shroff

Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis has assured strict action after gunmen opened fire at actor Tiger Shroff’s car in Mumbai’s Juhu area. Shroff suffered minor injuries, while two other people were injured.

Published

on

Tiger Shroff

Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis has assured strict action against those responsible for the firing incident involving Bollywood actor Tiger Shroff in Mumbai. The chief minister spoke to the actor after the incident and directed the Mumbai Police Commissioner to expedite the investigation and take action against the accused.

The shooting took place in Mumbai’s Juhu area on Sunday evening, October 18, when gunmen opened fire at the actor’s car as he was leaving a football venue. Tiger Shroff did not sustain any gunshot injuries but suffered minor injuries to his left hand from gunpowder and broken glass. Two other people, including his driver, were also injured in the incident.

Fadnavis directs police to speed up investigation

Following the incident, Fadnavis contacted Mumbai Police Commissioner Deven Bharti to seek details of the firing. He instructed the police to conduct a swift investigation, trace the accused and take strict action against those responsible.

The chief minister also spoke to Tiger Shroff and assured him of the government’s support, saying the accused would be traced and apprehended at the earliest.

The police have formed multiple teams to investigate the incident and identify those involved. According to reports published on October 19, 15 teams have been formed to track down the assailants.

Tiger Shroff suffers minor injuries in Mumbai firing

The incident occurred in Juhu as the actor was leaving a football venue in his car. Unidentified men allegedly arrived on a motorcycle and opened fire at the vehicle.

Although Tiger escaped direct gunfire, his driver sustained a gunshot injury. Another person, identified in reports as an autorickshaw driver, was also injured in the incident. Both were taken for medical treatment.

Police are investigating the circumstances surrounding the shooting and examining available evidence to identify the attackers.

Alleged gang claim under investigation

Following the firing, an audio recording and social media claims attributed to people claiming links to the Lawrence Bishnoi gang surfaced. The claims reportedly referred to Tiger Shroff’s association with actor Salman Khan. 

However, the authenticity of the claims had not been independently verified in the reporting available at the time. The claims should not be treated as confirmation of the attackers’ identity or the motive behind the shooting.

The investigation remains focused on identifying those who opened fire and establishing the circumstances behind the incident.

Continue Reading

India News

Journalist files police complaint against Rahul Gandhi over push allegation

Journalist Richa Parashar has filed a criminal complaint against Rahul Gandhi and others, alleging that she was pushed while covering the Opposition’s march to the Supreme Court. The Congress has denied the allegation.

Published

on

Journalist Richa Parashar has filed a police complaint against Congress leader Rahul Gandhi over an alleged incident during the INDIA bloc’s march to the Supreme Court in New Delhi on October 12. She has sought the registration of a First Information Report (FIR) against Gandhi and others, alleging that she was pushed while covering the protest.

Parashar submitted her complaint to the Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP), New Delhi district, on Friday, seeking immediate action. She has said she was three months pregnant at the time of the alleged incident and accused those involved of mistreatment, threats and the use of force.

What Richa Parashar alleged in her complaint

Parashar alleged that she was reporting on the Opposition’s march when the incident occurred. According to her earlier account, she was waiting near a gate on the Supreme Court premises to seek a response from Gandhi when he allegedly grabbed her hand and pulled her forward. She further alleged that his security personnel pushed her away, causing her to fall on the Supreme Court steps.

In her complaint, Parashar said she asked Gandhi questions before he allegedly pushed her towards a gate. She claimed that the force caused her to lose her balance and fall, and that her repeated requests not to be pushed were ignored.

Parashar has sought legal action against Gandhi and others whom she alleges were involved. The complaint reportedly seeks action under provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, including Sections 74, 115(2), 131, 125 and 3(5). These provisions concern alleged assault or criminal force against a woman, voluntarily causing hurt, assault or criminal force, acts endangering human life or personal safety, and joint liability for acts committed with common intention.

The allegations and the sections cited in the complaint do not, by themselves, establish criminal liability.

Congress disputes the allegation

The Congress has challenged Parashar’s account of the incident. According to report, the party said a video released by the journalist did not show the sequence of events she described.

Congress leader Alka Lamba also questioned the circumstances surrounding the incident and accused those raising the issue of attempting to manufacture propaganda.

The allegations remain disputed. The complaint and the competing accounts should not be treated as an established finding of wrongdoing.

Incident took place during Opposition’s Supreme Court march

The alleged incident occurred on October 12, when Rahul Gandhi and other INDIA bloc leaders marched to the Supreme Court to submit a petition concerning alleged irregularities in the Election Commission’s Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.

The Opposition has raised concerns about the voter-list revision process and alleged irregularities.

Parashar’s police complaint adds a legal dimension to the controversy surrounding the march. Any further action will depend on the police process and the relevant legal proceedings.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com