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

Amit Shah counters delimitation concerns, says southern states to gain Lok Sabha seats

Amit Shah assures Parliament that southern states will gain Lok Sabha seats after delimitation, countering opposition criticism during the women’s reservation debate.

Published

on

Amit Shah

Union Home Minister Amit Shah on Thursday addressed concerns over the proposed delimitation exercise, asserting in the Lok Sabha that southern states will not lose representation but instead see an increase in their number of seats.

His remarks came during a heated debate linked to the implementation of women’s reservation, where opposition parties have raised fears that population-based delimitation could reduce the political weight of southern states.

Shah rejected these claims, calling them misleading, and said the proposed framework ensures fairness while expanding the overall strength of the Lok Sabha.

Seat count to rise with expansion of Lok Sabha

The government has indicated that the total number of Lok Sabha seats could increase significantly as part of the delimitation process. In this expanded House, the combined representation of southern states is expected to rise from 129 seats at present to around 195 seats.

Shah emphasised that no state will lose seats in absolute terms, and the exercise is designed to reflect population changes while maintaining balance across regions.

State-wise projections shared in Parliament

During his address, Shah also provided indicative figures for individual southern states, suggesting notable increases in representation. According to the projections:

  • Tamil Nadu could see its seats rise substantially
  • Kerala, Telangana, and Andhra Pradesh are also expected to gain additional seats
  • Karnataka’s representation may increase as well

These figures were presented to counter the argument that delimitation would disproportionately favour northern states.

Political debate intensifies over linkage with women’s quota

The delimitation exercise has been closely linked to the rollout of women’s reservation, which proposes one-third seats for women in Parliament and state assemblies.

Opposition leaders have questioned this linkage, arguing that tying reservation to delimitation could delay its implementation and raise federal concerns. Some leaders have also warned that the move could impact national unity if apprehensions among states are not addressed.

The government, however, maintains that the reforms are necessary to ensure equitable representation and to align the electoral system with demographic realities.

Centre dismisses ‘false narrative’ on southern states

Shah reiterated that concerns about southern states losing influence are unfounded. He said the delimitation process will increase representation across regions and described the criticism as a “false narrative” aimed at creating confusion.

The issue is expected to remain a key flashpoint as Parliament continues discussions on the women’s reservation framework and related legislative changes.

Continue Reading

India News

PM Modi assures no discrimination in women’s quota, delimitation debate intensifies in Parliament

PM Narendra Modi has assured that women’s reservation will be implemented without discrimination, amid a heated debate over delimitation in Parliament.

Published

on

PM modi

Prime Minister Narendra Modi has assured that there will be no discrimination in the implementation of women’s reservation, as Parliament witnessed a sharp debate over the proposed linkage between the quota and delimitation exercise.

During the ongoing special session, the government reiterated its commitment to ensuring fair representation while addressing concerns raised by opposition parties regarding the timing and structure of the legislation.

The proposed framework aims to reserve 33 percent of seats for women in the Lok Sabha and state assemblies. However, its implementation is tied to a fresh delimitation exercise, which is expected after the next census.

Opposition questions timing and intent

Opposition leaders have raised concerns that linking the women’s quota to delimitation could delay its implementation. They argue that the process of redrawing constituencies may push the actual rollout further into the future.

The issue has triggered a broader political confrontation, with multiple parties questioning whether the move could alter representation across states.

Some critics have also alleged that the delimitation exercise could disproportionately benefit certain regions based on population, a charge the government has rejected.

Government reiterates commitment to fair implementation

Responding to these concerns, the Centre has maintained that the reforms are necessary to ensure accurate and updated representation based on population data.

Leaders from the ruling side have repeatedly emphasized that the process will be carried out transparently and without bias. The assurance that there will be “no discrimination” is aimed at addressing fears among states and opposition parties.

The debate marks a key moment in Parliament, with both sides engaging in intense exchanges over one of the most significant electoral reforms in recent years.

Continue Reading

India News

Give all tickets to Muslim women, Amit Shah says, attacking Akhilesh Yadav on sub-quota demand

A sharp exchange between Amit Shah and Akhilesh Yadav in Parliament over sub-quota for Muslim women highlights key divisions on women’s reservation implementation.

Published

on

A heated exchange broke out in Parliament during discussions on the women’s reservation framework, with Union Home Minister Amit Shah and Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav locking horns over the demand for a sub-quota for Muslim women.

The debate unfolded as the government pushed forward key legislative measures to implement 33% reservation for women in the Lok Sabha and state assemblies.

Akhilesh Yadav argued that the proposed reservation must ensure representation for women from marginalised communities, including Other Backward Classes (OBCs) and Muslim women. He said that without such provisions, large sections could remain excluded from political participation.

He also questioned the timing of the bill, alleging that the Centre was avoiding a caste census. According to him, a census would lead to renewed demands for caste-based reservations, which the government is reluctant to address.

Government rejects religion-based quota

Responding to the demand, Amit Shah made it clear that reservation based on religion is not permitted under the Constitution.

He stated that any proposal to provide quota to Muslims on religious grounds would be unconstitutional, firmly rejecting the idea of a separate sub-quota for Muslim women within the broader reservation framework.

The government has maintained that the existing framework already includes provisions for Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) women within the overall reservation structure.

Wider political divide over implementation

The issue of sub-categorisation within the women’s quota has emerged as a major flashpoint, even as most opposition parties broadly support the idea of women’s reservation.

Samajwadi Party leaders reiterated that their support for the bill depends on inclusion of OBC and minority women, while the government continues to defend its constitutional position.

The debate is part of a broader discussion during the special Parliament session, where multiple bills linked to delimitation and implementation of the women’s quota are being taken up.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com