English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Rafale deal: SC reserves its order on petitions challenging the deal and seeking court-monitored probe

Published

on

Rafale deal controversy

The Supreme Court today (Wednesday, November 14) reserved its judgment on pleas challenging the deal for procurement of 36 Rafale fighter jets from France and seeking a court-monitored probe into the matter.

A three-judge bench, headed by Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi and comprising Justices UU Lalit and KM Joseph, heard the arguments two days after the government submitted details on the decision-making process to finalise the Rafale fighter jet deal with France and the details of pricing in a sealed cover exclusively to the judges. A redacted version of decision making process was shared with petitioners.

The petitioners in the case include advocate Manohar Lal Sharma, lawyer Vineet Dhanda, AAP MP Sanjay Singh and former Union ministers Yashwant Sinha, Arun Shourie and activist lawyer Prashant Bhushan.

The petitioners wanted the Attorney-General, representing the Centre, to reply why a joint press statement was issued by Prime Minister along with French President Francois Hollande in April 2015, well over a year before the Cabinet Committee on Security finally approved the 36 jets’ deal signed in Sep 2016.

On the price of the Rafale aircraft, they said the government was hiding behind the secrecy clause of the agreement.

Arun Shourie, who was also present, said, “All that is spoken of as add on’s to the jets had figured in the original Request for Proposal,” adding, “Government is putting out all kinds of reports through ‘friendly media’.”

He argued that pricing was about public money and it must not be covered under secrecy agreement.

Attorney General KK Venugopal contended that “secrecy agreement has to be secret”. He argued that if the price is made public, adversaries would be able to relate it to the equipment. The AG said the secrecy is not about the price but the weaponry and avionics and if price is made public, adversaries would be able to relate it to the equipment.

The AG further asked if the court was competent to judicially review the Rafale deal, adding that the “matter is for experts to decide on, not the court”.

The bench then asked for the assistance of an Air Force officer on the issue. Deputy Chief of Air staff, Air Marshal VR Chaudhari and two other officers from Indian Air Force appeared in the Supreme Court to assist it on the issue of the procurement of 36 Rafale fighter jets from France.

They told the court that Sukhoi 30s were the latest to be inducted which is a third generation aircraft and added that the Indian Air Force does not have fourth or fifth generation aircraft in its fleet. The top court asked if there has been no induction of aircraft since 1985, the officers said “no”.

The government’s contention that procedure was followed was challenged, arguing that the Rafale deal qualified none of the three conditions laid down by the Defence Procurement Procedure (DPP).

It was contrary to the procedure laid down as the choice was not disclosed to the Cabinet, Defence Acquisition Council nor the Defence Minister. They argued that the government “short-circuited” the acquisition process, as it took the Inter-Government Agreement route to avoid giving tender.

Alleging gross violation of procedure in decision making process in the deal, Bhushan asked: “Who took the decision for 36 jets? On what basis did the PM announce the deal for 36 jets? He had no authority. How was 126 jets reduced to 36 jets?”

Asserting that not a single aircraft was delivered till now even after three-and-a-half years, he told the Supreme Court bench that if the 126 aircraft deal was still on, “at least 18 jets would have been delivered by April 2019”.

The government note in the Supreme Court on the Rafale deal said the prolonged impasse over the 126-aircraft deal had caused an “urgent need” to acquire 36 Rafale jets or two squadrons in a fly-away condition.

The documents provided by the government Monday claimed that the delay in concluding the Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) deal, during the UPA rule, gave India’s adversaries time to upgrade and equip their fighter fleets with advanced weaponry.

“During this long period of inconclusive 126 MMRCA process, our adversaries inducted modern aircraft and upgraded their older versions. They acquired better capability air-to-air missiles and inducted their indigenous fighters in large numbers. Further, they modernised and inducted aircraft with an advanced weapon and radar capabilities,” the government had said.

When asked by the CJI about the argument of the petitioner that France had not given a sovereign guarantee to the deal, the attorney general said there was “letter of comfort” from the French President.

The petitioners also questioned Reliance as the choice of offset partner, a company with no experience in manufacturing defence aircraft. Regarding the contentious offset details of the Rafale deal, Justice Joseph asked the additional defence secretary as to how the country’s interests would be protected if the offset partner did not carry out production.

“What was the need to amend offset guidelines with retrospective effect?” Joseph asked. The official said that it was for the government to accept the choice made by the Original Equipment Manufacturer of the offset partner. Venugopal said that Dassault had not yet submitted details of offset partner to government.

India News

BJP releases first list of 47 candidates for Kerala assembly polls

The BJP has released its first list of 47 candidates for the Kerala Assembly elections scheduled for April 9, including three former Union ministers.

Published

on

BJP releases list of candidates

The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) on Monday released its first list of 47 candidates for the upcoming Kerala Assembly elections scheduled for April 9.

Voting will take place for all 140 seats in the state assembly, with counting of votes scheduled for May 4. A party or coalition needs at least 70 seats to secure a majority in the House.

Among the candidates announced in the first list are three former Union ministers — Rajeev Chandrasekhar, V. Muraleedharan and George Kurian.

Key candidates announced

Kerala BJP chief and former Union minister Rajeev Chandrasekhar has been fielded from the Nemom assembly constituency. In the 2024 Lok Sabha election, Chandrasekhar lost the Thiruvananthapuram seat to three-time MP Shashi Tharoor, but he led in the Nemom assembly segment during that contest. The party believes this performance strengthens its prospects in the constituency.

Nemom has held political significance for the BJP since 2016, when senior leader O. Rajagopal won the seat and became the party’s first-ever MLA in the 140-member Kerala Legislative Assembly. The victory marked the BJP’s initial breakthrough in the state assembly.

However, the seat returned to the Left camp in the 2021 Assembly election when V. Sivankutty defeated BJP leader Kummanam Rajasekharan.

Former Union minister V. Muraleedharan will contest from the Kazhakoottam constituency, while George Kurian has been nominated from Kanjirappally.

Other candidates in the list

According to the list released by the party, several other candidates have also been announced for key constituencies. P. C. George will contest from Poonjar, R. Sreelekha from Vattiyoorkavu and Padmaja Venugopal from Thrissur.

The BJP has also nominated Sobha Surendran from Palakkad, Navya Haridas from Kozhikode North and Kavitha K. S. from Sulthanbathery, a reserved constituency.

Raji Prasad will contest from the Kunnathur seat reserved for Scheduled Castes, while R. Rashmi has been fielded from Kottarakkara.

Political backdrop in Kerala

Kerala’s electoral politics has traditionally alternated between the Left Democratic Front (LDF) and the Congress-led United Democratic Front (UDF). However, the BJP has been attempting to expand its presence in the state.

The alternating trend was interrupted in the 2021 Assembly election when the electorate returned the Pinarayi Vijayan-led government to power for a second consecutive term.

The BJP believes recent electoral performances and local body successes have strengthened its position as it prepares to contest the upcoming assembly polls.

Continue Reading

India News

Fire in ICU at SCB medical college hospital in Cuttack kills 10 patients

Ten patients died after a fire broke out in the trauma ICU at SCB medical college hospital in Cuttack early Monday morning. Odisha Chief Minister Mohan Charan Majhi announced compensation and ordered a judicial probe.

Published

on

A major fire at the trauma care intensive care unit (ICU) of SCB Medical College and Hospital in Cuttack, Odisha, early Monday morning left ten patients dead and several hospital staff members injured.

According to officials, the fire broke out between 2:30 am and 3:00 am in the trauma ICU where critically ill patients were undergoing treatment. Emergency teams rushed to the scene soon after the incident, and multiple fire engines were deployed to control the blaze and assist in rescue operations.

Odisha Chief Minister Mohan Charan Majhi said hospital staff were injured while evacuating patients from the affected ward during the emergency.

Patients shifted as rescue operations continued

Following the fire, 23 patients were moved to other departments and wards within the hospital to ensure their safety and continued medical care.

Speaking to reporters, the Chief Minister said seven critically ill patients died while being shifted to other ICUs and wards, while three more succumbed later.

“A total of 23 patients have been shifted to other departments. Seven serious patients died while shifting to other ICUs and wards, while another three patients died later. I have directed the concerned officers for proper treatment of the injured patients,” Majhi said.

Chief minister visits hospital, announces compensation

Soon after the incident, Majhi visited the hospital along with Odisha Health Minister Mukesh Mahaling to review the situation. They also met patients who were undergoing treatment at the facility.

The Chief Minister announced financial assistance of ₹25 lakh for the families of each deceased patient.

He also ordered a judicial probe into the incident to determine the cause of the fire and examine safety measures at the hospital.

Authorities continue to monitor the condition of injured staff members and patients who were shifted from the ICU.

Continue Reading

India News

Arvind Kejriwal moves Supreme Court against Delhi High Court order in excise policy case

Arvind Kejriwal has approached the Supreme Court challenging a Delhi High Court order related to proceedings in the excise policy case and alleging violation of his fundamental rights.

Published

on

Arvind Kejriwal

Aam Aadmi Party chief and former Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal has approached the Supreme Court of India challenging certain proceedings in the Delhi excise policy case and alleging a violation of his fundamental rights.

In a petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution, Kejriwal has questioned a decision of the Delhi High Court that put a freeze on remarks related to the investigation conducted by the Central Bureau of Investigation.

The petition also challenges an order of the High Court Chief Justice rejecting Kejriwal’s request to transfer the case to another bench.

Plea seeks change of bench

Earlier, on March 11, Kejriwal and several others submitted a representation to Delhi High Court Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya seeking reassignment of the case to what they described as an “impartial” judge.

In the representation, Kejriwal stated that he had a “grave, bona fide and reasonable apprehension” that the matter may not receive an impartial hearing before the current bench.

However, the Chief Justice declined the request and said the petition had been assigned as per the existing roster.

According to the communication sent by the High Court’s Registrar General on March 13 to eight individuals including Kejriwal, the Chief Justice noted that any decision on recusal must be taken by the judge hearing the matter and that there was no reason to transfer the petition administratively.

Order on trial court proceedings also challenged

Kejriwal has also challenged a March 9 order passed by Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma of the Delhi High Court.

In that order, Justice Sharma had stayed a trial court direction that called for an investigation into a CBI officer who handled the excise policy case. The High Court had also asked the trial court to defer proceedings connected to the anti-money laundering aspect of the case.

Justice Sharma had further rejected certain observations made by the trial court while discharging Kejriwal and 22 others, stating that some of those remarks were erroneous.

Hearing expected on CBI plea

Meanwhile, Justice Sharma is scheduled to hear a petition filed by the CBI challenging the discharge of Kejriwal, former Delhi Deputy Chief Minister Manish Sisodia and others in the excise policy case.

The matter remains under judicial consideration as the legal challenge now moves to the Supreme Court.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com