English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

CBI DSP AK Bassi challenges transfer to Port Blair in SC, claims evidence against Asthana

Published

on

CBI DSP AK Bassi challenges transfer to Port Blair in SC, claims evidence against Asthana

SC allows “whistleblower” Sana to seek police protection

Claiming he has incriminating evidence against CBI special director Rakesh Asthana whom he had been investigating before he was transferred to Port Blair, the agency’s Deputy Superintendent of Police AK Bassi challenged the order in the Supreme Court today (Tuesday, October 30).

While the Supreme Court declined to hear his plea today saying it did not require unrgent hearing, in another, related case, it directed the Hyderabad Police to provide adequate security to businessman Satish Babu Sana, on whose complaint the bribery case was registered against Rakesh Asthana.

Controversial Hyderabad-based businessman Sana, who claimed to have paid Rs 3 crore in bribe to Rakesh Asthana and is now being referred to as whistleblower in the graft case linking Asthana to meat exporter Moin Qureshi, had moved the apex court, on Tuesday (October 30), claiming that there was a threat to his life.

In his petition, filed by advocate K Parameshwar and argued by senior advocate Raju Ramachandran before a bench of Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justices UU Lalit and KM Joseph, Sana has said that while he is willing to cooperate with the CBI’s ongoing probe against Asthana, he fears that he will be intimidated and threatened by the probe agency to withdraw/modify his statements already made against the special director, who is currently on leave as per government orders.

The SC bench refused to stay CBI summons against Sana and also rejected his plea for recording of his statement in presence of retired former Supreme Court judge AK Patnaik who it has appointed to oversee a time-bound vigilance inquiry against exiled CBI chief Alok Verma.

Sana’s claim of having paid Rs 3 crore in bribe to Asthana to have his name cleared from a corruption case linked to Qureshi was the basis of the unprecedented FIR registered by the CBI against its controversial special director.

The FIR became the flashpoint in the continuing feud between Asthana and CBI chief Alok Verma with the latter urging the Prime Minister to grant sanction to prosecute the special director.

The government reacted to the trading of charges between Verma and Asthana by sending both officers on leave, divesting them of all responsibilities and appointing M Nageswara Rao as the agency’s interim director. Verma has challenged the government’s decision in the Supreme Court.

On Tuesday, while the top court allowed Sana to seek police protection, it declined to grant a stay on the notice issued by the CBI to the businessman asking him to appear before it for questioning in the cases linked to Sana.

In related development, CBI officer AK Bassi who was heading the probe in six corruption cases against Asthana and was transferred to Port Blair by interim chief Rao last week also approached the CBI challenging the transfer orders.

The CBI DSP informed the top court that he has “incriminating evidence” against Asthana in six graft cases and pleaded that the court must call for “evidence of technical surveillance” already carried out against the special director. He also told the top court a special investigation team or SIT must be set up to probe the bribery allegations against Asthana.

It may be recalled that Bassi along with all other officers probing Asthana were transferred out of Delhi by Rao hours after he took over as the interim CBI chief. Rao had replaced these officers with CBI sleuths who are perceived to be close to Asthana.

The Supreme Court had later, while hearing Verma’s petition, restrained Rao from taking any policy decisions till the next date of hearing in the plea moved by the CBI chief which is scheduled for November 25. The mass transfers and other decisions taken by the interim chief will be scrutinized by the Supreme Court, which asked the government to submit all orders by Rao in a sealed envelope.

The Supreme Court declined to hear Bassi’s petition on Tuesday stating that it did not require an urgent hearing.

Entertainment

Bharti Singh, Haarsh Limbachiyaa welcome second child after she’s rushed to hospital mid-shoot

Comedian Bharti Singh and her husband Haarsh Limbachiyaa welcomed their second child after she was rushed to hospital during a television shoot.

Published

on

Bharti

Popular comedian and television personality Bharti Singh and her husband, writer-host Haarsh Limbachiyaa, have welcomed their second child. The baby was born on Friday after Bharti was taken to the hospital following a sudden medical emergency earlier in the day, according to media reports.

Emergency during television shoot led to hospitalisation

As per available information, Bharti Singh was scheduled to shoot for the television show Laughter Chefs on Friday morning when her water broke unexpectedly. She was immediately rushed to a nearby hospital, where she later delivered her second child. No further details about the baby have been shared publicly so far.

The news of the delivery comes weeks after the couple announced Bharti’s second pregnancy on social media.

Pregnancy announcement and maternity shoot

Bharti Singh and Haarsh Limbachiyaa had revealed the pregnancy during a family vacation in Switzerland. A few weeks ago, Bharti also shared pictures from her maternity photoshoot, where she was seen wearing a blue silk gown with white floral patterns.

Sharing the photos online, Bharti wrote, “2nd Baby Limbachiya coming soon,” along with a baby emoji.

Family background

Bharti Singh and Haarsh Limbachiyaa became parents for the first time in 2022, when they welcomed their son, Lakshya.

The couple is among the most well-known faces on Indian television. Bharti is widely recognised for her comic timing and distinctive on-screen persona, while Haarsh has made his mark as a writer and host. Apart from their television work, the two also co-host a podcast together.

Continue Reading

India News

Renaming MGNREGA removes core spirit of rural employment law, says Shashi Tharoor

Published

on

Shashi Tharoor

Congress MP Shashi Tharoor has strongly criticised the renaming of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA), saying the move strips the rural employment programme of its core essence. His remarks came after Parliament cleared the Viksit Bharat Guarantee for Rozgar and Ajeevika Mission (Gramin) Bill, also referred to as the VB-G RAM G Bill.

Speaking to media, Tharoor said the decision to remove Mahatma Gandhi’s name from the scheme “takes out the heart” of the rural employment programme that has been in place for years. He noted that the identity and philosophy associated with Mahatma Gandhi were central to the original law.

Tharoor also objected to the way the new name was framed, arguing that it unnecessarily combined multiple languages. He pointed out that the Constitution envisages the use of one language in legislation, while the Bill’s title mixes English and Hindi terms such as “Guarantee”, “Rozgar” and “Ajeevika”, along with the conjunction “and”.

‘Disrespect to both names’

The Congress leader said that inserting the word “Ram” while dropping Mahatma Gandhi’s name amounted to disrespecting both. Referring to Mahatma Gandhi’s ideas, Tharoor said that for Gandhi, the concepts of Gram Swaraj and Ram Rajya were inseparable, and removing his name from a rural employment law went against that vision.

He added that the name of Lord Ram could be used in many contexts, but questioned the rationale behind excluding Mahatma Gandhi from a programme closely linked to his philosophy of village self-rule.

Protests over passage of the Bill

The VB-G RAM G Bill was passed by the Lok Sabha on December 18 and cleared by the Rajya Sabha in the early hours of December 19 amid protests from Opposition members. Several MPs opposed the manner in which the legislation was pushed through, with scenes of sloganeering and tearing of papers in the House.

Outside Parliament, members of the Trinamool Congress staged a sit-in protest near Samvidhan Sadan against the passage of the Bill. Congress also announced nationwide protests earlier this week, accusing the government of weakening rights-based welfare schemes.

Despite opposition criticism, the government has maintained that the new law will strengthen rural employment and livelihood security. The Bill raises the guaranteed employment from 100 days to 125 days per rural household and outlines a 60:40 cost-sharing formula between the Centre and states, with a higher central share for northeastern, Himalayan states and certain Union Territories.

Continue Reading

India News

Rahul Gandhi attacks G RAM G bill, says move against villages and states

Rahul Gandhi has criticised the G RAM G bill cleared by Parliament, alleging it dilutes the rights-based structure of MGNREGA and centralises control over rural employment.

Published

on

Rahul Gandhi

Leader of the Opposition Rahul Gandhi has launched a sharp attack on the Modi government after Parliament cleared the Viksit Bharat Guarantee for Employment and Livelihood Mission (Rural) Bill, commonly referred to as the ‘G RAM G’ bill. He described the proposed law as “anti-state” and “anti-village”, arguing that it weakens the core spirit of the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA).

The new legislation, which is positioned as an updated version of MGNREGA, was passed amid protests by opposition parties and is expected to replace the existing scheme once it receives presidential assent.

‘Bulldozed without scrutiny’, says Rahul Gandhi

Rahul Gandhi criticised the manner in which the bill was cleared, saying it was pushed through Parliament without adequate debate or examination. He pointed out that the opposition’s demand to refer the bill to a standing committee was rejected.

According to him, any law that fundamentally alters the rural employment framework and affects crores of workers should undergo detailed scrutiny, expert consultation and public hearings before approval.

Claim of dilution of rights-based guarantee

Targeting the central government, the Congress leader said the proposed law dismantles the rights-based and demand-driven nature of MGNREGA and replaces it with a rationed system controlled from Delhi. He argued that this shift undermines the autonomy of states and villages.

Rahul Gandhi alleged that the intent behind the move is to centralise power and weaken labour, particularly impacting rural communities such as Dalits, OBCs and Adivasis.

Defence of MGNREGA’s impact

Highlighting the role of MGNREGA, Gandhi said the scheme provided rural workers with bargaining power, reduced distress migration and improved wages and working conditions, while also contributing to rural infrastructure development.

He also recalled the role of MGNREGA during the Covid period, stating that it prevented crores of people from slipping into hunger and debt. According to him, any rationing of a jobs programme first affects women, landless workers and the poorest communities.

Opposition to name change and provisions

The Congress has also objected to the renaming of the scheme, accusing the government of attempting to erase the legacy associated with Mahatma Gandhi. Opposition MPs staged a dharna within the Parliament complex, questioning provisions of the bill that they claim dilute the “soul and spirit” of the original law enacted in 2005.

Under MGNREGA, the government guaranteed 100 days of work in rural areas along with an unemployment allowance if work was not provided. The ‘G RAM G’ bill proposes to raise the guaranteed workdays to 125, while retaining other provisions. However, critics have flagged concerns over employment being linked to pre-approved plans.

The bill was cleared after a midnight voice vote in the Rajya Sabha, following its passage in the Lok Sabha amid protests and walkouts. It will become law once approved by the President.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com