English हिन्दी
Connect with us

Latest Politics News

After Andhra, Bengal bar CBI, FM Jaitley says states not sovereign in corruption cases

Published

on

After Andhra, Bengal bar CBI, FM Jaitley says states not sovereign in corruption cases

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]Amid the escalating Centre-state clash with Mamata Banerjee government in Bengal joining Chandrababu Naidu government of Andhra Pradesh (AP) in withdrawing general consent given to the CBI to investigate any case in the state, Finance Minister Arun Jaitley today (Saturday, Nov 17)  hit back saying, “there’s no sovereignty of any state in the matter of corruption. Only those that have a lot to hide take the step of not letting the CBI come to the state.’’

Jaitley, who was in Bhopal to release the BJP’s manifesto for the assembly elections, alleged that the move in the case of Andhra Pradesh was motivated by the fear of what is likely to happen than by any particular case. Alleging that the top leadership of Trinamool Congress was involved in scams, he said the Sharda and Narada scams can’t be wiped out by merely saying we will keep away the CBI.

This, however, was disingenuous: the bar on CBI does not apply to cases already being investigated by it.

Earlier, Mamata Banerjee backed Naidu’s step and, addressing Trinamool Congress (TMC) workers, said, “We will also do the same in our state. We will cross-check the laws. They (the BJP) are giving instructions to agencies from their party offices. From CBI to RBI, they have turned institutions into disasters.”

AAP leader and Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, in a tweet, said: “Chandrababuji has done the right thing. Modi is misusing the CBI and Income Tax department…”

There was no immediate comment from the CBI but a former officer of the agency, who handed policy matters, said “withdrawal of consent simply means that CBI officers will lose all powers of a police officer as soon as they enter the state unless the state government has allowed them,” according to a report in The Indian Express (IE).

The BJP reacted angrily to Naidu’s move, saying Opposition parties have formed a “grand alliance of most corrupt parties to protect their interests”. Calling it a “clear malafide exercise of power”, BJP MP and its national spokesperson GVL Narasimha Rao told reporters: “A nervous and completely rattled Naidu is trying to save his government.”

The Andhra Pradesh government order comes at a time when Chandrababu Naidu is trying to rally non-BJP parties for an alliance in the run-up to the 2019 state and Lok Sabha elections.

Naidu has accused the BJP of conspiring with Andhra Pradesh Opposition leader YS Jagan Mohan Reddy to topple his government by using the CBI and Income Tax department. The I-T department had recently searched premises allegedly linked to TDP MP C M Ramesh.

As reported earlier, AP Home Department GO number 176, issued on November 8 by Principal Secretary A R Anuradha, stated: “In exercise of power conferred by Section 5 of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (Central Act No 25 of 1946), Government hereby withdraws the general consent accorded in GO No 109 Home (SC.A) Department dated August 3, 2018 to all members of the Delhi Special Police Establishment to exercise the powers and jurisdiction under the said Act in the State of Andhra Pradesh.’’

The CBI was established under the Delhi Special Police Establishment (DPSE) Act. An official of the Home Department l said that while Section 5 of the Act gives powers to the CBI over all areas in the country, Section 6 states that without the consent of the state concerned, it cannot enter that state’s jurisdiction.

However, the Supreme Court and high courts can ask the CBI to probe a crime in a particular state even if the state is not keen to let the agency in. The CBI, in case it considers necessary, can approach the SC and HCs for permission to take up cases or extend their investigation to a state which may wish to declare it to be out-of-bounds for the agency.

Also, the moves by AP and West Bengal governments will not affect ongoing investigations, filing of chargesheets and conduct of trials. Sources in the AP government conceded that the agency could continue to investigate and carry out raids in cases in which it has already obtained consent from the state government.

At present, no major CBI case is being investigated in Andhra Pradesh. The cases of meat exporter Moin Qureshi and businessman Sana Sathish Babu are registered in New Delhi. There is ambiguity, however, on whether the agency can carry out a search in the state in connection with an old case without the consent of the state government.

The Delhi High Court order on October 11, 2018 makes it clear that the agency can probe anyone in a state that has withdrawn “general consent” if the case is not registered in that state. The order came on a case of corruption in Chhattisgarh. The court ordered that CBI could probe the case without prior consent of Chhattisgarh government since the case was registered in Delhi.

This is not the first time that a state government has revoked “general consent” for CBI probes, pointed out media reports.

On an earlier occasion, Sikkim had withdrawn the “consent” the CBI is required to take as per Section 6 of the DSPE Act.

In 1998, the Janata Dal-led government of J H Patel in Karnataka had similarly withdrawn general consent to CBI. When the S M Krishna-led Congress government took over the reins of power in 1999, it did not feel the need to revoke Patel’s order. Leader of the Congress in Lok Sabha, Mallikarjun Kharge, was then Home Minister of Karnataka.

“It wasn’t renewed for eight years. The CBI had to virtually close down its office,” recalled an officer who was with the CBI then, said the IE report. The officer told IE that the agency had to seek permission of the state government for every case and every search, making it difficult to carry out surprise searches, or register a case not agreeable to the state government.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

India News

Mallikarjun Kharge seeks all-party meeting with PM Modi on delimitation

Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge has written to Prime Minister Narendra Modi for the fourth time, seeking an all-party meeting on delimitation. He also flagged the 64-day delay in proroguing Parliament’s Monsoon Session.

Published

on

Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge has renewed his demand for an all-party meeting with Prime Minister Narendra Modi to discuss the government’s proposed delimitation exercise, arguing that political parties must have adequate time to examine the proposals before they are finalised for consideration in Parliament.

In a letter to the prime minister on Friday, October 16, Kharge also raised concerns over what he described as an unprecedented delay in formally proroguing Parliament’s Monsoon Session. He said 64 days had passed since the session was adjourned sine die on August 13, while both Houses were yet to be prorogued.

Kharge seeks wider consultations on delimitation

Kharge said he had first written to Modi on April 11, requesting an all-party meeting before the government introduced a constitutional amendment bill concerning delimitation.

According to the Congress president, the government did not convene the requested meeting before making the bills public late on April 14 and calling a special session of Parliament on April 16.

The constitutional amendment bill on delimitation subsequently failed to secure the required two-thirds majority in the Lok Sabha on April 17.

Kharge said he had again written to the prime minister on July 16 and August 27, reiterating his demand for consultations. In his latest letter, he made the request for the fourth time, asking the government to discuss its revised proposals with political parties before finalising them for parliamentary consideration.

The Congress chief stressed that political parties should receive sufficient time to discuss the proposals among themselves and with other stakeholders.

He also cautioned the government against attempting to push through another far-reaching constitutional amendment without adequate deliberation.

Congress raises concern over Parliament session

Apart from delimitation, Kharge highlighted the delay in proroguing the Monsoon Session, which was adjourned sine die on August 13.

He described the 64-day gap as unprecedented and linked the issue to concerns about possible government plans to bring fresh delimitation proposals before Parliament.

Prorogation formally ends a parliamentary session. Kharge’s letter raised the issue while urging the government to ensure wider political consultation before proceeding with any new legislative proposals.

Jairam Ramesh shares Kharge’s letter

Congress general secretary for communications Jairam Ramesh also drew attention to the letter by sharing it on X.

Ramesh said Kharge had written to Modi about the delay in proroguing the Monsoon Session and the possibility of further government moves on delimitation.

The Congress’s latest demand centres on securing time for political parties to examine the government’s proposals before they are finalised for consideration in Parliament.

Continue Reading

India News

CJP leaders Saurav Das, Ashutosh Ranka, Ajinkya Shinde sent to 5-day judicial custody

Three CJP leaders, Saurav Das, Ashutosh Ranka and Ajinkya Shinde, were placed under preventive arrest following a protest at Delhi’s Jantar Mantar over Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.

Published

on

Three leaders of the Cockroach Janata Party (CJP) — Saurav Das, Ashutosh Ranka and Ajinkya Shinde — have been placed under preventive arrest in connection with a protest at Delhi’s Jantar Mantar, where demonstrators demanded the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar.

The three were detained early Tuesday after crossing police barricades and entering Jantar Mantar, which was recently removed from the list of designated protest venues. A case was registered against them over their alleged actions.

According to the police case, the charges include trespassing, violation of a bond, and obstructing a public official from performing official duties.

The three leaders were produced before a Special Court of the Executive Magistrate on Wednesday and could be sent to judicial custody at Tihar Jail.

Why CJP leaders protested at Jantar Mantar

The protest comes amid demonstrations by the CJP and opposition groups over alleged irregularities in the Special Intensive Revision (SIR) of electoral rolls.

The protesters were demanding the resignation of Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar. The controversy centres on allegations concerning the electoral roll revision exercise, which the Election Commission and the BJP have denied.

Jantar Mantar was recently removed from the list of designated protest venues in Delhi. The change followed an order naming alternative locations for demonstrations, prompting criticism from groups that want to hold protests at the established site.

CJP legal team raises concerns over detention

Ratna Singh, head of the CJP legal team, said in a post on X that Delhi Police had arrested Saurav Das, Ashutosh Ranka and Ajinkya Shinde at Parliament Street Police Station in connection with the Jantar Mantar case.

Singh alleged that the three were brought to the police station in a private van at around 3 am and were not allowed to meet their lawyers until late at night.

She also raised concerns about the legal process and the possibility of the leaders being sent to judicial custody.

The allegations regarding access to legal counsel were made by the CJP legal team and should be distinguished from the charges registered by the police.

The arrests mark another development in the ongoing dispute over protests at Jantar Mantar and the CJP’s campaign against the Chief Election Commissioner over the SIR exercise.

Continue Reading

India News

BJP focuses on religion as opposition pushes BDM strategy in UP

The BJP is emphasising religious issues ahead of the Uttar Pradesh Assembly elections, while opposition parties are seeking to consolidate Backward, Dalit and Minority voters. Recent exchanges involving Yogi Adityanath, Akhilesh Yadav and Asaduddin Owaisi have added to the political contest over the state’s electoral narrative.

Published

on

Ahead of the 2027 Uttar Pradesh Assembly elections, the BJP is emphasising religious issues, while opposition parties are seeking to build a coalition of Backward, Dalit and Minority voters. The competing approaches have brought caste representation and religious messaging to the forefront of the state’s political discourse.

Recent temple-related controversies in Kashi, Ayodhya, Mathura and Sambhal have brought religious messaging back into the political conversation. The developments have also coincided with exchanges between Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath and Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav over possible electoral contests.

Yogi Adityanath, Akhilesh Yadav trade election challenges

The latest round of political exchanges followed Yogi Adityanath’s invocation of the “80-20” formula during the Rajya Sabha election. Akhilesh Yadav subsequently challenged the Chief Minister to contest from Ayodhya.

During his visit to Ayodhya, the Samajwadi Party president attended a Bhagwat Katha but did not visit the Ram Mandir for darshan. His visit, during which he attended a Bhagwat Katha but did not visit the Ram Mandir for darshan, became another point of political discussion.

The Chief Minister responded during a visit to Balrampur, asking Akhilesh Yadav to contest against him.

The exchanges continued as political leaders questioned the Samajwadi Party chief’s religious outreach. State minister Om Prakash Rajbhar asked why Yadav had not visited Mathura, while AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi challenged him to contest from Sambhal.

Responding to questions about the challenges, Akhilesh Yadav said the Chief Minister does not decide which candidates the parties nominate.

At a press conference in Lucknow, Yadav also remarked, “What could be better than getting the Chief Minister’s chair without even contesting the election?” His comment suggested that Adityanath might not contest the Assembly elections.

Adityanath, meanwhile, said he was pleased to have several options available to him.

BJP works on its own caste coalition

Alongside its emphasis on religious issues, the BJP is also seeking to broaden its social support base through caste representation.

During the Rajya Sabha elections, the party fielded three candidates from Backward Classes, two Dalits, two Brahmins and one Rajput. The Backward Class candidates included representatives of the Pal, Kurmi and Lodh communities.

The report describes the BJP’s selection of candidates from the Sonkar and Rawat communities as an attempt to attract support among the Gaur and Jatav Dalit vote banks. Its selection of two Brahmins and one Rajput was also part of its outreach to upper-caste voters.

These choices reflect the BJP’s efforts to build a social coalition that extends beyond its religious messaging as the state approaches the next Assembly election.

Akhilesh Yadav balances caste outreach with temple politics

The Samajwadi Party is also combining its BDM approach with religious outreach, described in the report as “soft Hindutva”.

Akhilesh Yadav is overseeing the construction of the Kedareshwar Temple in Etawah. When questioned about not visiting the Ram Mandir during his Ayodhya trip, he said he was waiting for the temple’s “Pran Pratishtha”, or consecration ceremony, implying that the ceremony held in 2024 did not count.

Yadav has also raised the issue of alleged theft of offerings at the Ram Temple, a move the report interprets as an attempt to appeal to Hindu voters.

The competing strategies indicate that caste representation, religious issues and temple-related controversies are all featuring in political messaging ahead of the 2027 Uttar Pradesh Assembly elections.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com