English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Chidambaram in Tihar Jail as ED did not take his custody after asking for it all along

Published

on

Chidambaram in Tihar Jail as ED did not take his custody after asking for it all along

Congress leader and former union minister P Chidambaram was yesterday sent to Tihar jail, even as he tried hard to avoid judicial custody, since the Enforcement Directorate (ED) did not take his custody after fighting for it in the courts for over a month.

The ED, which had been arguing for denial of his anticipatory bail in INX Media money laundering case and succeeded in getting Supreme Court to reject his plea, did not take him into custody, thereby ensuring that he was sent to the most notorious jail of country.

If ED would have filed an application to arrest the former finance in INX media case as his anticipatory bail application was rejected, Chidambaram would have been remanded to its custody, instead of being sent to Tihar jail.

As it happened, the Rouse Avenue Court sent P Chidambaram to judicial custody till Sep 19 in INX Media case being probed by CBI.

The ED, which had wanted to arrest Chidambaram since his anticipatory bail application was rejected by Delhi high court on August 20, interestingly did not file application before the trial court.

Also Read: PM Narendra Modi refuses sofa, asks for chair at the Eastern Economic Forum

Chidambaram also filed an application that he wants to surrender before the ED in INX media case but SG Tushar Mehta, representing ED, told that he would like to argue on this next week. The Court issued notice to ED and sought its reply and said that it will hear the Chidambaram’s surrender application on Sep 12.

The CBI which had P Chidambaram in their custody for the last 15 days, also pressed that Chidambaram should be sent to Tihar jail.

Arguing against judicial custody senior Congress leader and lawyer Kapil Sibal said: “I am willing to go to Enforcement Directorate custody if they want, but why to judicial custody? Either I surrender, let Enforcement Directorate take custody, I don’t have a problem.”

The CBI said: “The accused is a powerful and influential person, so should be sent to judicial custody.” Sibal countered that there had been no case of tampering with or influencing evidence.

If the Enforcement Directorate had arrested Chidambaram, he would have been taken to the Tughlaq Road police station, where another Congress leader, DK Sivakumar, was already incarcerated.

Ordering judicial custody for him, the Court granted Chidambaram a separate cell with adequate security after hearing a separate plea seeking directions to the Jail authorities to ensure safe detention while in judicial custody while having a separate cell with adequate security.

Earlier, the Supreme Court rejected Chidambaram’s plea for protection from arrest by ED. “Anticipatory bail has to be exercised sparingly in cases of economic offences. Considering the facts and circumstances, this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail,” the Supreme Court said, The court said that the investigating agency has to be given sufficient freedom to conduct its probe, and the grant of anticipatory bail at this stage would hamper investigation.

Chidambaram did manage to get pre-arrest bail in another case, the Rs. 3,500-crore Aircel-Maxis deal involving a clearance of $800 million foreign investment in 2006, allegedly in exchange of kickbacks.

The Enforcement Directorate has accused Mr Chidambaram of money-laundering in the case involving INX Media, which is being investigated by the CBI.

The CBI accuses Mr Chidambaram of misusing his position as Finance Minister of the country in 2007 while facilitating a huge infusion of foreign funds in INX Media at the instance of his son Karti Chidambaram.

The allegations against Chidambaram and his son are based on the information from INX Media co-founders Peter Mukerjea and Indrani Mukerjea, who are currently jailed in Mumbai in connection with the murder of Indrani’s daughter Sheena Bora.

Karti Chidambaram, who allegedly received kickbacks for his role in securing the foreign funds, was arrested in 2018 and released after 23 days.

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court had extended Chidambaram’s CBI custody for two days after his lawyer said the 74-year-old leader should not be sent to Tihar jail, where arrested persons are taken when they do not get bail after the end of police custody.

After the court ordered judicial custody for Chidambaram, Sibal moved an application asking the court to provide security to Chidambaram — he has Z-category cover — in a cell with a cot and western toilet. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for CBI, told the court that adequate safety arrangements will be made during Chidambaram’s stay in judicial custody. He has been allowed to carry his medicines to jail.

Also Read: Relief for NDTV as Bombay HC strikes down SEBI order against news channel

Chidambaram, who was taken to the Tihar jail on Thursday evening, will get no special facilities, except a separate cell and a Western toilet as specified by the court, said reports quoting prison officials. Like other inmates, he will also have access to the prison’s library and can watch television for a specified period.

After the mandatory medical check-up, Chidambaram was lodged in Jail No. 7, which usually houses those accused in Enforcement Directorate cases. Incidentally, his son Karti was also lodged in this cell for 12 days in the same case last year.

The cell was prepared in advance, with the jail authorities anticipating that the senior Congress leader might turn up in view of the ongoing court cases against him, they said.

Ratul Puri, nephew of Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Kamal Nath, who is being probed by the ED in connection with the AgustaWestland and a bank fraud case, is also lodged in this jail.

India News

Centre sends 3 letters to Punjab government after anti-drug activist’s killing

The Centre has sought reports from the Punjab government on three incidents linked to allegations surrounding drug-related activities, including the killing of anti-drug activist Parvinder Singh Jhota.

Published

on

Amit Shah

The Union government has sought detailed explanations from the Punjab government regarding three incidents linked to concerns over drug-related activities in the state. The move follows the killing of anti-drug activist Parvinder Singh Jhota in Mansa and comes amid renewed scrutiny of the state’s drug problem and law-and-order situation.

The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) sent three letters to the Punjab chief secretary on October 16, with copies to the state’s director general of police. The communications sought information about Jhota’s killing, the fatal attack on Bikramjit Singh in Gurdaspur district, and the reported suicide of Gulzar Singh in September.

What the Centre’s three letters cover

The first letter concerned the October 13 killing of Parvinder Singh, popularly known as Jhota, who was known for raising concerns about drug abuse and alleged illegal sales of intoxicating substances in Punjab.

The ministry sought a comprehensive factual report on the incident and details of the steps taken by the state government following his death. It also asked about action taken on the Union government’s Vision Document on Narcotics Control for 2026–2029.

The document outlines measures to strengthen anti-narcotics enforcement, including dedicated anti-narcotics task forces, financial investigations, prosecution under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, and action against transnational drug networks.

The second letter concerned the attack in Mari Panwan village in Gurdaspur district, in which Bikramjit Singh died and Nishan Singh and Gurmukh Singh were critically injured.

According to accounts cited in the report, the three men had objected to alleged drug peddling in their village before being attacked with sharp-edged weapons. However, police have denied that the incident was motivated by drug-related disputes and said an investigation was underway. Bikramjit’s relatives have also disputed the police account that the murder followed a dispute over a mobile phone.

The third letter sought details about Gulzar Singh’s death on September 8. The ministry referred to reports that he had raised concerns about the availability of synthetic drugs and had faced pressure and harassment from the local village panchayat. These allegations form part of the circumstances the Centre has asked the state government to examine and report on.

Amit Shah raises questions over Punjab’s law and order

Union Home Minister Amit Shah also raised concerns about the situation in Punjab, referring to the challenges posed by drugs, gangsterism and organised crime.

Questioning the Bhagwant Mann-led government over public safety, Shah called for action against the drug trade, protection for young people and strict measures against criminals.

The Centre’s requests place the three incidents under scrutiny, although the alleged links between the attacks or deaths and opposition to drug-related activities remain subject to the specific circumstances and investigations in each case.

Continue Reading

India News

Mallikarjun Kharge seeks all-party meeting with PM Modi on delimitation

Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge has written to Prime Minister Narendra Modi for the fourth time, seeking an all-party meeting on delimitation. He also flagged the 64-day delay in proroguing Parliament’s Monsoon Session.

Published

on

Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge has renewed his demand for an all-party meeting with Prime Minister Narendra Modi to discuss the government’s proposed delimitation exercise, arguing that political parties must have adequate time to examine the proposals before they are finalised for consideration in Parliament.

In a letter to the prime minister on Friday, October 16, Kharge also raised concerns over what he described as an unprecedented delay in formally proroguing Parliament’s Monsoon Session. He said 64 days had passed since the session was adjourned sine die on August 13, while both Houses were yet to be prorogued.

Kharge seeks wider consultations on delimitation

Kharge said he had first written to Modi on April 11, requesting an all-party meeting before the government introduced a constitutional amendment bill concerning delimitation.

According to the Congress president, the government did not convene the requested meeting before making the bills public late on April 14 and calling a special session of Parliament on April 16.

The constitutional amendment bill on delimitation subsequently failed to secure the required two-thirds majority in the Lok Sabha on April 17.

Kharge said he had again written to the prime minister on July 16 and August 27, reiterating his demand for consultations. In his latest letter, he made the request for the fourth time, asking the government to discuss its revised proposals with political parties before finalising them for parliamentary consideration.

The Congress chief stressed that political parties should receive sufficient time to discuss the proposals among themselves and with other stakeholders.

He also cautioned the government against attempting to push through another far-reaching constitutional amendment without adequate deliberation.

Congress raises concern over Parliament session

Apart from delimitation, Kharge highlighted the delay in proroguing the Monsoon Session, which was adjourned sine die on August 13.

He described the 64-day gap as unprecedented and linked the issue to concerns about possible government plans to bring fresh delimitation proposals before Parliament.

Prorogation formally ends a parliamentary session. Kharge’s letter raised the issue while urging the government to ensure wider political consultation before proceeding with any new legislative proposals.

Jairam Ramesh shares Kharge’s letter

Congress general secretary for communications Jairam Ramesh also drew attention to the letter by sharing it on X.

Ramesh said Kharge had written to Modi about the delay in proroguing the Monsoon Session and the possibility of further government moves on delimitation.

The Congress’s latest demand centres on securing time for political parties to examine the government’s proposals before they are finalised for consideration in Parliament.

Continue Reading

India News

Abhijeet Dipke detained ahead of CJP’s national flag march in Delhi

Cockroach Janta Party founder Abhijeet Dipke was detained by Delhi Police on October 16, 2026, shortly before a planned national flag march. The proposed rally followed the judicial custody of two CJP members who had waved the Tricolour at Jantar Mantar.

Published

on

Cockroach Janta Party (CJP) founder Abhijeet Dipke was detained by Delhi Police on Friday, October 16, shortly before he was due to participate in a planned national flag march in the capital.

According to the report, police personnel reached Dipke’s residence and detained him just minutes before the proposed ‘Lehra Do Tiranga’ rally. The march was planned in Delhi amid tensions over restrictions on demonstrations and the detention of CJP members.

The latest detention marks the second time Dipke has been detained within a week. He was previously detained after arriving at Delhi’s airport from Mumbai for a protest against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar over allegations of manipulation during the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.

Why was the national flag march planned?

One of the main triggers for the planned march was the judicial custody of two CJP members, Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka.

The two were sent to five-day judicial custody after entering Jantar Mantar while waving the national flag on October 13. The incident occurred a day after the historic protest site was denotified as a protest location, according to the report.

The proposed march was called ‘Lehra Do Tiranga’. CJP planned the rally amid its continuing opposition to Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar over alleged electoral irregularities.

The allegations concerning voter-list manipulation remain allegations and should not be presented as established findings.

Police had issued a notice before the detention

Before detaining Dipke, Delhi Police personnel visited his residence and served him a notice advising him against holding the proposed march.

The notice was issued under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), according to the report. It stated that prohibitory orders were in force in the Connaught Place area.

The notice also cited the absence of permission from the New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC) for the proposed Tiranga Yatra. It warned that proceeding with the march despite the restrictions would be considered a violation of the law.

The detention came amid heightened attention to the proposed gathering in central Delhi and the dispute over whether the planned march could proceed under the prevailing restrictions.

A second detention in a week

Dipke’s latest detention followed his earlier detention at Delhi airport after he arrived from Mumbai for a planned protest over the SIR exercise and allegations concerning voter-list manipulation.

The latest episode adds to the ongoing confrontation between CJP and the authorities over its proposed demonstrations. The immediate context for the October 16 march was the judicial custody of two party members following their appearance at Jantar Mantar with the national flag.

The report does not establish that the allegations of electoral manipulation are proven, nor does it provide a final judicial determination of the dispute surrounding the planned march.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com