English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

CBI imbroglio: Supreme Court reinstates Alok Verma as CBI chief, with conditions

Published

on

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]The Supreme Court today (Tuesday, Jan 8) set aside Narendra Modi government’s post-midnight order of Oct 23 divesting Alok Verma of his charge to act as head of the CBI.

The apex court observed that the government should have referred to the Select Committee consisting of the Chief Justice of India (CJI), Prime Minister and Leader of Opposition to initiate Alok Verma’s removal and directed the High Power Committee under DSPE Act to act within a week to consider Verma case.

Alok Verma can go back to his office now but cannot take any major policy decisions till the High Powered Committee decides on his status.

The judgment on Tuesday was penned by CJI Ranjan Gogoi. However, the CJI didn’t attend the court and the judgment was pronounced by Justices SK Kaul and KM Joseph.

The Supreme Court said it was quashing the order sending him on leave since the government had no authority to take action against the CBI Director. The only institution that can take any action against a CBI director is the special committee that appoints the director, the Supreme Court ruled today. “The legislative intent of insulating the CBI director is manifest,” said the three judges who set aside the government’s move unanimously.

The decision comes just 23 days before Verma’s tenure as CBI Director comes to an end: his term ends on January 31.

Verma had filed a plea against the Centre’s decision to divest him of powers and sending him on leave.

The Centre had also sent CBI’s Special Director Rakesh Asthana on leave and appointed CBI‘s Joint Director M Nageswara Rao, a 1986 batch Odisha-cadre IPS officer as interim director. Nageswar Rao took charge and signed off on the transfer of half-a-dozen officers on Verma’s team.

In its verdict, the Supreme Court has observed that the procedure to remove an incumbent CBI director has been set out in law. “If there was intent to specify interim measures for Director CBI then the legislation would have contained the provision,” the Supreme Court observed, referring to the government appointing M Nageshwar Rao as interim CBI chief.

Asthana remains on forced leave. There is also no decision on the transfers ordered by Nageswar Rao.

The public spat between the two top officers of India’s premier investigative agency witnessed a lot of mudslinging with both levelling allegations of corruption against each other.

Verma had sought quashing of three orders of October 23, 2018 — one by the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) and two by the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT), as being without jurisdiction and in violation of Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution.

The Centre had justified its decision to divest Verma of his duties and sending him on leave before the apex court saying he and Asthana were fighting like “Kilkenny cats”, exposing the country’s premier investigating agency to “public ridicule”.

On December 6, after hearing arguments on behalf of Verma, the Centre, the CVC and others, a bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi had reserved the judgement.

Political reactions

In the charged political atmosphere in view of 2019 Lok Sabha elections due after a couple of months, the verdict was seen as a setback to the Narendra Modi government which has been accused of manipulating CBI and the country’s other investigative agencies to promote its political interests and harass its rivals.

Finance Minister Arun Jaitley defended the government’s action of sending the two senior officers of the CBI on leave and took the plea that it was done on the recommendation of the CVC (Central Vigilance Commission). “This action was taken perfectly bonafide as there were cross-allegations made by both the officers, and in accordance with recommendations of the CVC. The government felt that in the larger interest of fair and impartial investigation and credibility of CBI, the two officers must recuse themselves,” Jaitley told reporters outside Parliament.

Opposition projected the judgement as vindication of their criticism that the government was behaving arbitrarily.

The Congress, which alleges that Verma was removed because he intended to launch a probe into the Rafale jet deal, said, “We welcome the Supreme Court’s verdict lambasting the government against their illegal removal of Alok Verma as CBI Director.”

Congress leader Mallikarjun Kharge said the verdict is a lesson for the government. “We’re not against one individual, welcome SC’s judgement, it’s a lesson for govt. Today you’ll use these agencies to pressurise people, tomorrow somebody else will, What will happen to democracy then?” he told reporters, reported news agency ANI

Congress leader Randeep Singh Surjewala said Narendra Modi is the first prime minister to have “his illegal orders set aside by the Supreme Court.”

“Modiji adds another 1st to his list. After being the first PM to be exposed destroying the #CBI before the SC, After having ruined CVC’s credibility (requiring supervision by former SC judge),Mr. Modi has now become 1st PM to have his illegal orders set aside by the SC,” he tweeted.

“Let this be a lesson to you about the strength of our democracy and the Constitution. Let this be a lesson that howsoever despotic u may be, law catches up in the end,” he added.

Arvind Kejriwal tweeted that the court ruling was a “direct indictment” of Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

He also accused Modi government of “ruining all institutions and democracy” in the country.  “Wasn’t CBI director illegally removed at midnight to stall the probe in Rafale scam which directly leads to PM himself?” he tweeted

PDP leader Mehbooba Mufti said it was time for Centre to stop arm-twisting agencies.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

India News

Supreme Court questions EC over missing records in Sringeri election dispute

The Supreme Court questioned the Election Commission over missing video footage of the 2023 counting in Karnataka’s Sringeri constituency. The case involves a revised result following a recount of postal ballots.

Published

on

The Supreme Court on Wednesday questioned the Election Commission of India (ECI) over its inability to locate video recordings of the original vote counting in Karnataka’s Sringeri Assembly constituency in 2023. The court said it would not accept what it described as “lame excuses” and directed the poll body to produce whatever records are available at the next hearing.

A bench of Justices Sanjay Kumar and Sanjeev Sachdeva expressed displeasure after the Election Commission’s counsel informed it that the footage of the original counting could not be traced.

The bench also warned that it could draw an adverse inference if the required documents were not produced.

Questioning how the poll body could lose records relating to an election it had conducted, the judges stressed that maintaining election documentation was central to its responsibilities.

“How can the Election Commission of India say that it has lost the records? Your whole purpose is to hold an election, and you need to have a document. Where is the question of you saying we are trying to trace it?” the bench asked.

“We will not accept these kinds of lame excuses,” it added.

What is the Sringeri election dispute?

The case stems from the 2023 Karnataka Assembly election in Sringeri, where Congress leader TD Rajegowda was initially declared the winner.

The result was challenged by BJP candidate Jeevaraj before the Karnataka High Court. The High Court later ordered a recount of postal ballots, including the reverification of 279 rejected postal votes.

Following the recount, the Returning Officer declared a revised result in which Jeevaraj was declared the winner. Rajegowda then approached the Supreme Court to challenge the revised outcome.

In May, the Supreme Court granted interim relief to Rajegowda, directing that he continue as the Member of the Legislative Assembly while his plea remained pending.

Rajegowda seeks counting records and observer’s report

Rajegowda has sought access to the election observer’s report and video recordings of both the original counting conducted in 2023 and the recount held this year.

The missing original counting footage became a point of concern during Wednesday’s hearing, with the bench questioning the Election Commission’s inability to trace the recording.

The court directed the Commission to submit whatever records it possesses at the next hearing. Its warning about a possible adverse inference underscores the importance the bench attached to the production of the requested documents.

The court has scheduled the next hearing for February 15, 2027.

Continue Reading

India News

Rahul Gandhi joins India Gate protest by Ankita Bhandari’s parents

Rahul Gandhi joined the protest by Ankita Bhandari’s parents at India Gate in New Delhi on October 14. The demonstration has brought renewed attention to the 2022 murder case and the family’s concerns following Dushyant Gautam’s appointment as Sikkim Governor.

Published

on

Congress leader Rahul Gandhi joined a protest by the parents of Ankita Bhandari at India Gate in New Delhi on Wednesday, October 14, bringing renewed attention to the 2022 murder case from Uttarakhand.

The family’s demonstration follows the appointment of Dushyant Gautam, a former BJP leader associated with the party’s Uttarakhand organisation, as Governor of Sikkim. The appointment has prompted objections from Ankita’s family and political leaders, who have raised concerns about the case and the demand for justice.

Congress MP Priyanka Gandhi Vadra also met the family, according to reports.

Why Ankita Bhandari’s family is protesting

Ankita Bhandari, 19, worked as a receptionist at a resort in Uttarakhand. She was murdered in September 2022, and the case triggered widespread public anger and demands for accountability.

The protest has returned to the spotlight amid questions raised by the family and activists over the alleged role of a VIP in the case. These allegations and demands should be distinguished from findings established through the criminal proceedings.

Dushyant Gautam’s appointment as Sikkim Governor has become a fresh point of contention because his name has been linked to allegations surrounding the alleged VIP connection. Such allegations should not be treated as proof of involvement in the crime.

Political reactions and demand for justice

Rahul Gandhi’s participation brought the Congress leadership into the family’s latest protest in the national capital. The demonstration reflects continuing demands for accountability and further clarity over the concerns raised by the family.

The case has remained a subject of public and political debate, including questions about the investigation and the alleged VIP connection. The family’s concerns and the political reactions have renewed attention on the demand for justice for Ankita Bhandari.

Continue Reading

India News

Meerut murder: Muskaan Rastogi and Sahil Shukla get death sentence

A Meerut court has sentenced Muskaan Rastogi and Sahil Shukla to death in the blue drum murder case involving the killing of merchant navy officer Saurabh Rajput in March 2025.

Published

on

A court in Meerut has sentenced Muskaan Rastogi and Sahil Shukla to death for the murder of Saurabh Rajput, Muskaan’s husband and a former Merchant Navy officer. The sentencing was pronounced on Wednesday, October 14, 2026, after the court convicted the two in the case widely known as the Meerut blue drum murder.

The case involved the killing of Rajput in March 2025 and the concealment of his dismembered remains inside a blue plastic drum sealed with cement and sand.

The two were convicted on September 30. The prosecution had sought the death penalty, arguing for the maximum punishment in the case.

Court verdict follows 126 hearings

The trial involved 126 hearings and statements from 22 prosecution witnesses. District Judge Arvind Kumar Mishra delivered the sentence after the court considered the evidence presented during the proceedings.

The investigation and prosecution relied on a combination of circumstantial, technical and physical evidence. This included forensic findings, witness testimony and material recovered during the investigation.

The case drew attention after police discovered Rajput’s remains inside the cement-filled drum at the couple’s residence in Meerut.

How Saurabh Rajput was killed

According to the prosecution’s account of the case, Rajput was killed in March 2025 after he returned to Meerut from London. Investigators alleged that Muskaan and Sahil had planned the murder.

The prosecution said Rajput was given food laced with sleeping medication before he was attacked. His body was subsequently dismembered, and the remains were placed inside a blue plastic drum.

The drum was filled with a mixture containing cement and sand and sealed. Investigators later recovered the remains from inside it.

Evidence presented during the investigation

Investigators built the case using several strands of evidence. Shopkeepers provided testimony about the purchase of materials, including a blue drum, cement, sand and cutting implements, before the murder.

Call detail records and mobile tower information were also cited to establish Sahil’s presence at the residence around the time of the crime. The prosecution further relied on post-mortem findings that confirmed Rajput had died from stab injuries.

The investigation also traced the movements of Muskaan and Sahil during their trip to Himachal Pradesh following the killing. Investigators said photographs and activity linked to Rajput’s phone were used to create the impression that he was still alive.

The case came to light in March 2025

The murder came to light after questions arose over Rajput’s whereabouts. According to the investigation, the couple’s attempt to move the heavy drum eventually raised suspicion.

Rajput’s family approached the police, leading to an investigation that uncovered the remains. Muskaan and Sahil were arrested in March 2025.

The sentencing on October 14 marks a major development in the case, which had proceeded from the discovery of Rajput’s remains to a trial involving dozens of witness statements and more than a hundred hearings.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com