English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

SNC Lavalin case: SC to re-examine Kerala CM Vijayan’s discharge in case

Published

on

SNC Lavalin case: SC to re-examine Kerala CM Vijayan's discharge in case

SC admits CBI’s appeal against discharge of Pinarayi Vijayan and others in the case by Kerala HC, stays trial till further orders

In a move that could have serious political ramifications in Kerala, the Supreme Court on Thursday (January 11) admitted an appeal by the CBI challenging the discharge of chief minister Pinarayi Vijayan and two others in the SNC Lavalin corruption case by the Kerala High Court.

The apex court, which is hearing an appeal filed by other accused in the case who had not been discharged by the Kerala High Court, stayed the trial till further orders and issued notices to Vijayan, K. Mohanachandran and A Francis. Mohanachandran and Francis were senior officials in the Kerala government’s department of power in the 1990s when the alleged SNC Lavalin scam took place while Vijayan was the state’s energy minister.

Vijayan and the two others had been discharged in the case by the Kerala High Court in August last year. The CBI had appealed to the apex court against their discharge from all criminal and corruption charges and argued that the case needed to be re-heard.

On Thursday, a Bench of Justices NV Ramana and S Abdul Nazeer issued notice on the CBI appeal to Vijayan – now the Kerala chief minister – and the two former bureaucrats of the Kerala power department. However, the apex court dismissed the discharge petitions moved by KG Rajasekharan Nair, then Member (Accounts) of the Kerala State Electricity Board (KSEB) and Kasthuriranga Iyer, who was Chief Engineer (Generation) in the Board.

Nair and Iyer had submitted before the apex court that they should have been treated at par with Vijayan and the other two accused who had been discharged in the case. The Bench has now asked the CBI to counter the submissions made by Nair and Iyer.

Additional Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the Bench: “I have a problem with the release of some accused alone” while asserting that the Kerala High Court had overstepped its jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution and that the SNC Lavalin case needed to be re-heard. The CBI also told the apex court that there was “ample material to show the involvement” of Vijayan in the SNC Lavalin deal involving the award of contracts for the renovation of the three hydel power projects in Kerala in the 1990s.

The CBI said that the Kerala High Court had accused the premier investigation agency of adopting a “pick and choose” policy in naming the accused in the case but had employed the same tool while discharging Vijayan and some others from the case and leaving the rest of the charge-sheeted persons to face trial.

“All decisions [in the Lavalin deal) were taken with the knowledge of all the accused persons named in the charge sheet… discharge of the accused may lead to miscarriage of justice and delay the trial,” the CBI petition has contended.

“It is a matter of fact that there was ample material to prima facie show conspiracy in the matter, which may have been appreciated at the stage of trial only,” it said.

Appearing for the appellants in the case, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi urged the Bench to grant status quo on the trial proceedings stating that appeals made against earlier orders in the case by the Kerala High Court were pending before the Supreme Court.

“We have not been discharged. Continuation of trial will be detrimental to us now,” Rohatgi said on behalf of his client.

All accused, except the three discharged – including Kerala chief minister Pinarayi Vijayan – are facing trial for causing a loss of Rs 86.25 crore in the KSEB’s contracts with Canadian company SNC Lavalin for the renovation and modernisation of Pallivasai, Sengulam and Panniar hydroelectric power projects in Idukki district of Kerala.

The work was awarded to Lavalin, which was a consultancy firm, allegedly without inviting any tenders for the works that were estimated to cost Rs 243.74 crore. By the time work was completed, the costs had escalated to Rs 374.5 crore. Besides, the KSEB had failed to execute a binding agreement from Lavalin for a grant of Rs 98.3 crore for the construction of the Malabar Cancer Centre. A criminal case was registered on February 12, 2007 and the CBI filed its charge sheet on June 12, 2009.

For several years since the alleged scam broke, it was the cause of much political discomfiture for Vijayan. Political observers in Kerala claim that his alleged role in the SNC Lavalin scam is what had stalled his elevation to the Kerala chief minister’s post in May 2006 when the Left Front won the state assembly polls. The post eventually went to Vijayan’s senior and bitter rival VS Achuthanandan despite the latter’s advancing age.

In the run up to the May 2016 Kerala Assembly polls, the then incumbent Congress-led coalition government under Oomen Chandy, which was also facing charges of corruption, had sought to rake up Vijayan’s alleged involvement in the Lavalin scam hoping to dent the Left Front’s imminent romp to power in the state.

Less than a year after Vijayan became chief minister, the Kerala High Court discharged him in the Lavalin case giving him the much needed political and moral high ground to challenge the alleged corruption of his predecessor’s government and also hit out at Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s BJP government at the Centre.

Over the past two years, Vijayan has been one of the most strident critics of the BJP among the Opposition leaders from across the country and has systematically succeeded in ensuring that the saffron party’s plans of making political inroads in Kerala do not succeed. His stature within the Left Front, more specifically the CPI (M), has also seen a meteoric rise and he has consolidated his position as the undisputed leader of the Kerala faction of the party, along with Prakash Karat. It was Vijayan’s ‘veto’ that dashed the party’s Bengal faction’s effort of securing a third Rajya Sabha term for Sitaram Yechury last year.

However, with the possibility of the SC now re-examining his discharge in the SNC Lavalin case and ordering that he stand trial for the over-two decade old alleged scam, tough political times lie ahead for Vijayan.

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