English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Four IB men caught outside residence of CBI Director Alok Verma’s residence

Published

on

Four IB men caught outside residence of CBI Director Alok Verma’s residence

Four men, identified as Intelligence Bureau (IB) operatives, were rounded up today (Thursday, October 25) morning from outside the residence of Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) director Alok Verma, a day after the government sent him on ‘compulsory leave’.

Verma has described as “patently illegal” in a petition before the Supreme Court which would hear the case tomorrow.

The men were observed loitering in two motor cars outside the perimeter and were confronted by Verma’s official security detail, said media reports. They were handed over to Delhi Police.

Deputy Commissioner of Police Madhur Verma, however, denied that the police had detained the four men and were questioning them.

Media reports quoting sources said the four men, who were stationed outside Verma’s 2, Janpath residence from Wednesday night, were questioned and then taken away by the police.

There was speculation in some circles that the men could be looking for ways to plant listening devices or were keeping an eye on visitors to the residence.

This follows a search and raid of the CBI headquarters on Wednesday that was carried out by unidentified intelligence and police officials. While some explained that the search was to secure sensitive documents, others said that, on the contrary, the search was to find and remove documents that could prove troublesome or embarrassing for the Narendra Modi government.

While there was no word from Home Minister Rajnath Singh on the Thursday affair, Intelligence Bureau sources claimed that the presence of personnel at a “high security zone” like the area surrounding Verma’s residence is part of routine practice.

According to IB sources, the agency is responsible for collecting “intelligence on situations” that could affect “public order” and “internal security.” IB units are deployed on a regular basis in sensitive areas and while in some cases “this is done in association with local law enforcement agencies”, other times an element of surprise “is also built in.”

“Among other things, its units are routinely deployed on a regular basis in sensitive areas. At times, this is done in association with local law enforcement agencies and at other times, a surprise element is also built in. This also enables LEAs to respond immediately to developing situations,” the sources said, according to a report in The Hindustan Times (HT).

They added that since such officials are on routine duties, they carry their identity cards. This is unlike surveillance which is done covertly, without any visible appurtenances, they said.

“One such unit, in early hours of today, halted on Janpath, where there was an unusual collection of people. This was with a view to check the reason why people had collected at the location. This is a high-security zone where several protectees reside. Unfortunately, their presence was projected otherwise,” the sources said.

The episode fuelled the opposition campaign that the Modi government acted against Verma because of its fears over what steps the CBI may take on crucial investigations.

Main opposition party the Congress has attacked the government alleging that the men were “snooping” on Alok Verma, who was stripped of powers as CBI chief on Wednesday.

“After making CBI as ‘Central Burial of Investigation’, the (Narendra) Modi government now stoops to a ‘new low’ – Snooping on ‘forcibly removed’ CBI Director through IB,” Congress spokesperson Randeep Singh Surjewala said. “Let everyone be forewarned – IB is heading the CBI way!” Congress Randeep Singh Surjewala tweeted.

In the wee hours of Wednesday, the government in a late night move, sent the two top officials of CBI, Director Alok Verma and his deputy special director Rakesh Asthana on compulsory leave and appointed joint director M Nageshwar Rao as acting CBI chief. There has been a running feud between Verma and Asthana, with Verma questioning the decision to appoint Asthana to CBI, citing corruption cases two years ago.

The CBI then filed a FIR against Asthana and some others, one of whom was arrested. The government finally woke up on Tuesday when Verma relieved Asthana of his responsibilities and acted overnight, a move that has invited speculation as well as criticism.

Verma has moved the Supreme Court against the government decision, calling it patently illegal. The case would be heard tomorrow.

According to the Indian Express, Verma was dealing with seven sensitive cases when the Narendra Modi government minister decided to pull the plug on him:

* A complaint against alleged irregularities in the Rafale fighter deal with France: The verification process of the complaint was on in the agency and, sources said, “a decision was to be taken”. The 132-page complaint was received by Verma on October 4, and had been filed by former Union Ministers Yashwant Sinha and Arun Shourie and lawyer Prashant Bhushan.

* The CBI has been probing the role of highly-placed individuals in the Medical Council of India (MCI) bribery case, which implicated retired High Court judge I M Quddusi. The chargesheet against Quddusi, sources said, had been prepared and was ready for Verma’s signature.

* The case of Justice SN Shukla of Allahabad High Court, who was sent on leave following allegations of corruption in medical admissions, had been identified as fit for investigation. Sources said a PE had been prepared and was awaiting Verma’s signature.

* Another case being looked at by the CBI was BJP MP Subramanian Swamy’s letters to the CBI, complaining against Finance and Revenue Secretary Hasmukh Adhia.

* The alleged role of IAS officer Bhaskar Khulbe, Secretary to the Prime Minister, is being investigated by the CBI in a case of allocation of coal mines.

* In another case, a Delhi-based middleman was raided in the first week of October. An alleged pay-off list and Rs 3 crore in cash were found and the CBI was told he had a role in bribing politicians and officials for “senior Public Sector Unit appointments”.

* The CBI probe into Sandesara and the Sterling Biotech case was nearing completion, and the alleged role of Asthana was being investigated.

Question over govt action against CBI director – Supreme Court to hear it tomorrow

There are questions about the legality of government action against the CBI Director – whether it has the authority to divest him of his powers and send him on compulsory leave. The Supreme Court, while hearing Verma’s plea, is expected to deal with the question. At a press conference on Wednesday, Union finance minister Arun Jaitley argued that the decision to send the two top officials on leave was due to a recommendation by the Central Vigilance Commission – a recommendation that is not in the public domain. “It was absolutely essential to restore the agency’s institutional integrity and credibility,” Jaitley said.

However, under the law, the chief of the CBI enjoys a fixed two-year term. It is argued that the government cannot even transfer him, much less divest him of his powers and send him on leave. In the 1998 Vineet Narain & Others vs Union of India Supreme Court case, the Supreme Court defines the powers of a selection committee to choose the CBI chief. The judgment is clear: “The transfer of an incumbent director, CBI, in an extraordinary situation, including the need for him to take up a more important assignment, should have the approval of the selection committee.”

Since 2013, as per the terms of the Lokpal Act, this selection committee is to consist of the prime minister, the leader of the opposition in Lok Sabha and the chief justice of India or a judge of the Supreme Court nominated by him. No selection committee recommended Verma’s forced leave. It was done on the orders of the Union government alone.

Moreover, the role of the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) in the CBI only comes in to play when there is a case under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. No such case exists against Verma. Hence, the Union government’s argument that it was acting on the advice of the CVC does not hold water either.

India News

Rahul Gandhi, Centre clash over Ladakh deepens as eight Congress MPs suspended

The Lok Sabha saw repeated disruptions after Rahul Gandhi was denied permission to speak on the Ladakh issue, leading to protests and the suspension of eight Congress MPs.

Published

on

Chaos engulfed the Lok Sabha on Tuesday as tensions between the opposition and the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party intensified over Congress leader Rahul Gandhi’s attempt to raise the issue of the India-China military standoff in Ladakh. The disruption eventually led to the suspension of eight Congress MPs for the remainder of the parliamentary session.

The confrontation unfolded after the Leader of the Opposition tried, for the second consecutive day, to read out excerpts from an unpublished book by former Army chief General M.M. Naravane that refer to the 2020 Ladakh crisis. The Speaker denied permission, citing procedural rules, triggering protests from opposition members.

Several MPs protested by refusing to speak when called upon, expressing solidarity with Gandhi. The uproar forced repeated adjournments of the House and, according to reports, involved members throwing pieces of paper towards the Chair.

Following the disorder, eight Congress MPs — including Hibi Eden, Amarinder Raja Warring and Manickam Tagor — were suspended. Warring later questioned the action, saying the protests were in response to Gandhi being denied the opportunity to speak despite having authenticated the document and submitted it to the House.

The BJP strongly criticised the Congress leadership. Party MP Anurag Thakur accused Rahul Gandhi of undermining Parliament and insulting the armed forces, alleging that the opposition was attempting to distract from recent government actions, including the presentation of the Union Budget. He also said the BJP would move a formal complaint seeking strict action against the suspended MPs.

Outside Parliament, Gandhi accused the ruling party of trying to silence him, saying he was prevented from speaking on the sensitive issue of the India-China border. He argued that he had followed procedure by authenticating the content he wished to quote but was still denied permission.

What happened a day earlier

On Monday, the Speaker had also disallowed Gandhi from reading the excerpts, with senior ministers countering his remarks during the debate. Government sources later maintained that the Congress leader violated House rules by attempting to introduce unpublished material into the official record without prior approval.

When proceedings resumed on Tuesday, Gandhi again raised the matter, insisting that the information had been authenticated. As the Speaker moved on to other members, two opposition MPs from the Samajwadi Party and Trinamool Congress declined to speak, signalling their support for him.

Rahul Gandhi targets India-US trade deal

Separately, Gandhi also criticised Prime Minister Narendra Modi over what he described as a lack of transparency surrounding the India-US trade deal. He questioned how negotiations that had reportedly remained unresolved for months were concluded overnight and alleged that the agreement compromised the interests of Indian farmers, particularly in agriculture and dairy.

Government sources, however, rejected these claims, stating that sensitive sectors would remain protected and that the deal does not undermine farmers’ interests. They said contentious issues, including market access, had been carefully handled.

The opposition has demanded full disclosure of the terms of the agreement, even as both sides continue to trade sharp political accusations inside and outside Parliament.

Continue Reading

India News

Mamata Banerjee alleges mass voter deletions in Bengal, targets Election Commission

Mamata Banerjee has accused the Election Commission of deleting thousands of voter names without due process, raising questions over the timing of the exercise ahead of elections.

Published

on

Mamata Banerjee

West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee on Monday intensified her attack on the Election Commission over voter roll revisions, alleging that a large number of names have been deleted without due process as the state heads towards elections.

Addressing party workers, Banerjee claimed that 40,000 voters’ names were removed from her constituency alone, alleging that the deletions were carried out unilaterally and without giving voters a chance to be heard.

“In my constituency they have deleted 40,000 voters’ names unilaterally… Even a murderer gets a chance to defend himself,” she said.

Allegations against election officials

The chief minister directly accused an election official, alleging political bias and irregular conduct in the revision process. She claimed that voter names were being removed while officials sat in Election Commission offices, calling the process illegal.

“They cannot do it, it is illegal. 58 lakh names have been unilaterally deleted,” she said, echoing claims earlier made by Trinamool Congress leader Abhishek Banerjee.

Banerjee also alleged that individuals described as “micro-observers” had been appointed illegally, claiming they had no role under the Representation of the People Act and were linked to the BJP.

‘Alive but marked dead’

In a dramatic moment during her address, the chief minister asked those present who had been marked as deceased in the voter lists to raise their hands.

“See, they are alive but as per the Election Commission they are dead,” she said.

She further alleged that names were being deleted under the category of “logical discrepancy,” adding that even noted economist and Nobel laureate Amartya Sen had earlier been questioned regarding the age of his mother.

Questions over timing of voter roll exercise

While stating that she did not oppose the Special Intensive Revision process in principle, Banerjee questioned the timing of the exercise.

“I have no problem with SIR, but why do it on the eve of elections? Why not after elections?” she asked.

Reiterating confidence in her party’s organisational strength, the chief minister said she was prepared to fight the issue politically and democratically.

Continue Reading

India News

Supreme Court raps Meta over WhatsApp privacy policy

The Supreme Court warned Meta that it would not tolerate any compromise of citizens’ privacy while hearing a case related to WhatsApp’s 2021 privacy policy and a CCI penalty.

Published

on

WhatsApp

The Supreme Court on Tuesday delivered strong observations against Meta, the parent company of WhatsApp, over the messaging platform’s 2021 privacy policy, warning that it would not tolerate any compromise of citizens’ privacy.

A bench led by Chief Justice Surya said the court would not allow the sharing of user data in a manner that exploits Indians, remarking that privacy protections under the Constitution must be followed. “You can’t play with privacy… we will not allow you to share a single digit of our data,” the Chief Justice said during the hearing.

The matter relates to a plea challenging the law tribunal’s decision that upheld a ₹213 crore penalty imposed by the Competition Commission of India (CCI) on WhatsApp, while also permitting certain data-sharing practices for advertising purposes.

Court questions accessibility of privacy policy

During the hearing, the court raised concerns about whether WhatsApp’s privacy policy could realistically be understood by large sections of the population, particularly those who are poor or not formally educated.

The bench questioned if users such as roadside vendors, rural residents, or people who do not speak English would be able to comprehend the policy’s terms. It also expressed scepticism about the effectiveness of opt-out clauses, stating that even legally trained individuals find such policies difficult to understand.

Describing the alleged data practices as potentially exploitative, the court said it would not allow private information to be taken without genuine and informed consent from users.

The Chief Justice also cited a personal example, suggesting that users often begin seeing advertisements shortly after exchanging sensitive messages on WhatsApp, such as medical conversations, raising questions about how user data is being utilised.

Arguments from government and Meta

Appearing for the government, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta criticised WhatsApp’s data-sharing practices, calling them exploitative and commercially driven. In response, the Chief Justice said that if companies cannot operate in line with constitutional values, they should not do business in India.

Senior advocates Mukul Rohatgi and Akhil Sibal, appearing for Meta and WhatsApp, countered the allegations by asserting that all WhatsApp messages are end-to-end encrypted and that the company cannot read message content.

Background of the case

In November 2024, the CCI ruled against WhatsApp over its 2021 privacy policy, holding that the company had abused its dominant market position by effectively forcing users to accept the updated terms.

The watchdog objected to WhatsApp making continued access to messaging services conditional on permitting data-sharing with other Meta platforms, leading to the imposition of a ₹213 crore fine. Meta has deposited the penalty.

In January 2025, Meta and WhatsApp challenged the CCI order. Later, in November 2025, the law tribunal lifted a five-year restriction on data-sharing while maintaining the financial penalty.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com