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

Delhi deploys 25,000 personnel, installs CCTV cameras ahead of CJP march

More than 25,000 police and paramilitary personnel have been deployed in Delhi ahead of the CJP’s planned protest march at Connaught Place. Authorities have also imposed restrictions and stepped up CCTV surveillance.

Published

on

Delhi has stepped up security ahead of a planned protest march by the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP), with more than 25,000 police and paramilitary personnel deployed and additional surveillance measures introduced in parts of the national capital.

The planned “Lehra Do Tiranga” march is scheduled to take place at Central Park in Connaught Place on Friday, October 16. Authorities have also imposed prohibitory orders in Connaught Place and surrounding areas as part of the security arrangements.

Security tightened across Connaught Place

The security arrangements include the deployment of police and paramilitary personnel, along with the installation of additional CCTV cameras at Central Park and Rajiv Chowk Metro Station.

Prohibitory orders have been imposed under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) in Connaught Place and nearby areas. Central Park is also scheduled to remain closed for two days, with authorities advising the public to avoid the area during the arrangements.

A high-level meeting chaired by Delhi Police Commissioner Anurag Kumar, attended by senior police officers, was held on Thursday to review preparations ahead of the planned demonstration.

Why CJP is planning the march

The CJP has called the march to protest the arrest of its leaders Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka and to demand the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar over alleged irregularities in voter rolls.

The party’s protest is centred on its allegations concerning the electoral roll revision process. These are the protesters’ claims and should not be treated as independently established findings.

With Jantar Mantar no longer designated as a protest site, Central Park in Connaught Place has emerged as the proposed location for the fresh demonstration. The protest has also received support from the Aam Aadmi Party and the All India Students’ Association, according to the report.

Traders raise concerns over business disruptions

The heightened security measures have also prompted concerns among traders in the area.

Traders at Palika Bazaar have expressed concern about disruptions during the festive season, pointing to losses associated with previous protests. The concerns reflect the potential impact of repeated demonstrations and security restrictions on commercial activity in central Delhi.

Delhi Police has said it will facilitate peaceful demonstrators selectively while maintaining public order and protecting property.

Continue Reading

India News

Mallikarjun Kharge’s ‘Your Friends’ jab at Rahul Gandhi over congress exits

Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge took a dig at Rahul Gandhi after the Leader of the Opposition reportedly described former party leaders Jyotiraditya Scindia and Ghulam Nabi Azad as among those who had left the Congress.

Published

on

Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge made a pointed remark about former Congress leaders after Rahul Gandhi reportedly described some of those who left the party as people who had been driven by personal interests or fear. The exchange took place during an informal interaction involving young Congress workers, according to a report published on October 15.

Rahul Gandhi, the Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, reportedly referred to former Congress leaders Jyotiraditya Scindia and Ghulam Nabi Azad while discussing people who had left the party. Kharge responded with a quip that drew attention to Rahul Gandhi’s earlier association with the leaders.

What Rahul Gandhi said about leaders who left Congress

During the interaction, Rahul Gandhi reportedly said that the Congress was now left with committed workers, describing those who remained in the party as ‘babbar sher’ or lions. He alleged that people who were greedy or afraid had left, citing Scindia and Azad as examples.

His reported remarks referred to people who, he suggested, had left because of the attraction of positions and security or fear of investigative agencies such as the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).

These were Rahul Gandhi’s political characterisations of the leaders who left the Congress, rather than independently established explanations for their departures.

Kharge’s response to Rahul Gandhi

Reacting to Rahul Gandhi’s account, Kharge remarked, “They were all your friends.”

The comment referred to the association Rahul Gandhi had previously shared with some of the leaders who later left the Congress. Rahul Gandhi responded by saying that his sister, Priyanka Gandhi Vadra, was present and knew that Scindia was not his friend.

He subsequently reflected on the difficulty of identifying friends and opponents in politics, saying that people who appear to be friends may not necessarily be so, and the reverse may also be true.

Why Jyotiraditya Scindia and Ghulam Nabi Azad were mentioned

Jyotiraditya Scindia left the Congress in 2020 and joined the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). His departure was followed by a political crisis in Madhya Pradesh that resulted in the fall of the Congress government led by Kamal Nath.

Ghulam Nabi Azad, a veteran Congress leader, resigned from the party in August 2022. In his resignation letter, he criticised Rahul Gandhi’s leadership and the functioning of the party’s internal decision-making process.

Both leaders subsequently became prominent examples in political discussions about senior figures leaving the Congress, although their reasons and circumstances differed.

Rahul Gandhi’s message to young Congress workers

The interaction also focused on protests and political mobilisation. Rahul Gandhi reportedly told young Congress workers that demonstrations and struggles were part of their political training and encouraged them to explore new and creative ways of protesting.

He also suggested holding protests at Jantar Mantar, according to the report.

Congress president Kharge and Priyanka Gandhi Vadra were present during the interaction. Rahul Gandhi also claimed that the government led by Prime Minister Narendra Modi was dependent on the next eight to 10 months, though the report did not establish this as an independently verified assessment.

The exchange between Kharge and Rahul Gandhi offered a glimpse into the Congress leadership’s informal discussions, while bringing the departures of Scindia and Azad back into the political conversation.

Continue Reading

India News

Delhi Police offers 11-person limit for CJP’s Connaught Place protest

Delhi Police has offered to facilitate a group of 11 people at Central Park in Connaught Place for the Cockroach Janata Party’s October 16 protest, while warning that violations of prohibitory orders could invite legal action.

Published

on

CJP protest to continue

Delhi Police has proposed allowing a group of 11 people to carry the national flag and sing the national anthem at Central Park in Connaught Place on October 16, ahead of a protest called by the Cockroach Janata Party (CJP) over alleged electoral fraud.

The police said it could facilitate the group at a suitable place in the park, while appealing to the public not to join the proposed gathering in large numbers. The offer comes amid prohibitory orders in Connaught Place and adjoining areas under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).

CJP founder Abhijeet Dipke has called on people to assemble at Central Park at 5 pm on Friday with the national flag. The proposed demonstration, named “Lehra Do Tiranga”, follows the detention of CJP members Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka during an earlier protest.

Why Delhi Police proposed limiting the gathering

In its statement, Delhi Police cited the prevailing security and law-and-order situation in the area. It also referred to information from the New Delhi Municipal Council (NDMC) that Central Park would remain closed on October 16 and 17 for administrative reasons.

Deputy Commissioner of Police Neha Yadav said the NDMC had informed the police about the closure and had asked that no gathering be allowed near the park.

The police also cited representations from trader and market associations in Connaught Place and surrounding areas. According to the police, the associations had raised concerns about unlawful assemblies and their impact on businesses, particularly during the festive season.

Police warned that violations of Section 163 BNSS would invite appropriate legal action. It also stressed that the national flag must be displayed and carried, and the national anthem sung, in the prescribed manner with due respect and dignity.

Delhi High Court declines to stop CJP protest

The proposed gathering reached the Delhi High Court after a vendor sought intervention over concerns about disruption to businesses and public movement in Connaught Place.

On Thursday, the court declined to restrain the CJP from holding the protest. It recorded the police’s assurance that all possible measures under the law would be taken to regulate the gathering and maintain peace.

The petition was filed by a vendor at Palika Bazar in Connaught Place, who raised concerns about the potential impact of the demonstration on traders and others working in the area.

Additional Solicitor General Chetan Sharma, appearing for the authorities, told the court that steps had already been taken to regulate the proposed protest.

CJP’s protest call follows detention of party members

Dipke’s October 16 protest call follows earlier demonstrations over alleged electoral fraud. CJP members Saurav Das and Ashutosh Ranka are in jail on trespass charges after raising the national flag at Jantar Mantar earlier this week, according to the report.

The party has been protesting over alleged electoral fraud and has raised questions about the Election Commission.

Dipke has urged people to gather at Central Park with the national flag, arguing that raising the Tricolour should not be treated as a crime.

The police’s proposal to facilitate a group of 11 people came as the authorities sought to prevent a larger gathering at the site. The CJP’s response to the police’s offer was still awaited in the report published on October 15.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com