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

Veeramani POCSO case: Vijay questions Stalin over earlier probe

Tamil Nadu Chief Minister Vijay has questioned MK Stalin over the handling of the Veeramani POCSO case, while Stalin has rejected allegations that the previous DMK government protected anyone.

Published

on

Actor Vijay

Tamil Nadu Chief Minister and Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) president C Joseph Vijay has questioned DMK president MK Stalin over the handling of the POCSO case involving Gem Granites founder R Veeramani. The political exchange follows renewed investigation into allegations involving minor girls.

Vijay’s remarks came as the ruling TVK stepped up its questions about how the case was handled during the previous DMK government. The party’s IT wing has alleged that the earlier investigation was weakened and questioned why a final report was filed.

The allegations have been rejected by the DMK. Stalin has said that no order was issued by the DMK government to protect anyone in the case and has called the allegations false and defamatory.

What did Vijay say about the Veeramani case?

Vijay questioned Stalin over the handling of the case and demanded an explanation from the former chief minister.

The TVK has specifically questioned why action was not taken against Veeramani during the previous administration and why the earlier investigation resulted in a closure report.

The party has also raised questions about the role of officials involved in the earlier investigation. These are political allegations made by the TVK and have not been established as facts.

What is the Veeramani POCSO case?

The case concerns allegations of sexual abuse of minors involving R Veeramani, the founder of Gem Granites.

The case came under renewed scrutiny after a special POCSO court rejected an earlier closure report and ordered further investigation. The expanded probe has subsequently identified additional alleged survivors who were minors at the time of the alleged offences, according to current reporting.

The investigation is also examining the circumstances surrounding the earlier probe and whether there were any lapses in how the case was handled.

What has MK Stalin said?

Stalin has rejected allegations that the previous DMK government protected Veeramani.

He has said that no order was issued by the DMK government to shield anyone in the case. Stalin has also said that everyone responsible for the alleged offences, including anyone who aided or attempted to protect the accused, should face the law.

The DMK president has further said that the focus should remain on securing justice for the affected girls rather than making political allegations.

Why has the case become a political issue?

The Veeramani case has become the subject of a political dispute between the ruling TVK and the DMK over the handling of the earlier investigation.

The TVK is questioning the previous government’s handling of the case, while the DMK has denied that it intervened to protect the accused.

At this stage, claims about political interference or deliberate weakening of the earlier investigation should be treated as allegations unless established by the ongoing investigation or judicial proceedings.

Continue Reading

India News

Women wrestlers challenge Brij Bhushan’s acquittal in sexual harassment case

Four women wrestlers have challenged the acquittal of former WFI chief Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh and co-accused Vinod Tomar in a sexual harassment case.

Published

on

Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh

Four women wrestlers have approached a Delhi court challenging the acquittal of former Wrestling Federation of India (WFI) chief and BJP leader Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh in a sexual harassment case.

The wrestlers have also challenged the acquittal of co-accused Vinod Tomar. The matter is scheduled to be heard by a Special Judge at the Rouse Avenue Courts.

The appeal challenges the order passed by an Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate on August 3, 2026, when Brij Bhushan and Tomar were acquitted in the case.

Wrestlers challenge court’s reasoning

In their appeal, the wrestlers have argued that the acquittal order is legally unsustainable and that the evidence was not assessed appropriately.

They have also alleged that the order relied on assumptions about how victims of sexual assault and harassment were expected to behave instead of assessing the evidence and circumstances of the complainants.

The challenge seeks judicial scrutiny of the findings that resulted in the acquittal of Brij Bhushan and Tomar.

Brij Bhushan was acquitted in August

The Rouse Avenue court acquitted Brij Bhushan Sharan Singh on August 3 in the sexual harassment case involving women wrestlers. The court’s decision followed consideration of the evidence and statements presented during the proceedings.

The case had emerged after several women wrestlers accused the former WFI chief of sexual harassment. The allegations had led to a major protest by wrestlers in 2023.

The latest appeal means the acquittal is now being challenged before a higher court.

Continue Reading

India News

Congress protests against Gyanesh Kumar, demands Election chief’s resignation

Congress workers took to the streets against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, with protests and demonstrations held over the party’s allegations concerning the Election Commission.

Published

on

Congress stepped up its campaign against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, with party workers taking to the streets and demanding his resignation amid the ongoing row over the Election Commission.

The protests followed repeated criticism by Congress leaders of the poll panel and its functioning. The party has alleged irregularities in the electoral process and has sought accountability from the Election Commission.

Congress leaders have also targeted Gyanesh Kumar personally, with Rahul Gandhi among those calling for the Chief Election Commissioner to step down.

Congress takes protest to streets

Congress workers staged demonstrations in different places as part of the party’s campaign against the Election Commission.

The protests featured sharp symbolism, including masks and handcuffs, as Congress sought to highlight its allegations against the poll panel and demand action against Gyanesh Kumar.

The demonstrations are part of a wider confrontation between the Congress and the Election Commission over issues related to electoral rolls and the conduct of elections.

Congress demands Gyanesh Kumar’s resignation

The Congress has repeatedly demanded the resignation of Gyanesh Kumar, accusing the Election Commission of failing to adequately address the concerns raised by the opposition party.

Rahul Gandhi has also stepped up his criticism of the poll panel. In a statement on Thursday, he demanded that Gyanesh Kumar resign and alleged that the Election Commission had acknowledged the issue of “vote theft”. These are allegations made by the Congress and should not be treated as an established finding unless confirmed by the relevant authority.

The dispute comes amid a broader political debate over electoral rolls, voter verification and the functioning of the Election Commission.

Election Commission under opposition scrutiny

The Congress has intensified its campaign against the poll body in recent weeks, with party leaders repeatedly questioning its decisions and procedures.

The Election Commission, meanwhile, has maintained that India’s electoral process is conducted according to the Constitution, electoral laws and prescribed procedures. Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar has previously defended the integrity of the electoral system and rejected claims that electronic voting machines can be remotely hacked.

The latest protests add to the continuing political confrontation over the Election Commission and the opposition’s demands concerning the poll panel’s functioning.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com