English हिन्दी
Connect with us

Latest Politics News

Rafale deal: Explain choice of offset partner, give us details of pricing in 10 days, SC tells govt

Published

on

Rafale Deal

The Narendra Modi government, which has so far focused on rhetoric rather than answer questions being raised about the controversial Indo-France Rafale deal, was told by the Supreme Court today (Wednesday, October 31) to submit within 10 days the details of pricing and the selection of Anil Ambani’s defence firm as Indian offset partner in a sealed cover.

It said these details should also be provided to the petitioners in the case. Otherwise, the Centre should file an affidavit – within these 10 days – to say that the pricing in the Rafale fighter jet deal between India and France is exclusive and cannot be shared with the court.

“Court would also like to be appraised about the pricing” of the aircraft, “particularly the advantages thereof”, a bench of Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi and Justices UU Lalit and KM Joseph ordered.

“We would like the details of pricing and cost to be submitted to the Supreme Court in a sealed cover. This may be submitted in the next 10 days,” said the court.

The government argued that pricing was not revealed in Parliament and the earlier government had also not disclosed such details. Chief Justice Gogoi said the government could file an affidavit or legal document in court.

“If pricing is something exclusive and you are not sharing it with us, please file an affidavit and say so,” the bench told Attorney General KK Venugopal in its oral observations.

“Such details that may be considered strategic may not be furnished to the petitioners,” said the court.

Beginning the hearing, the judges made the observation that the suitability of the jet and its utility has not been questioned. “What had been questioned is the bonafide of the decision-making and price,” they said.

In the last hearing earlier this month, the court had asked the government to furnish details of the decision-making process that led to the deal which has Anil Ambani’s Reliance Defence as its offset partner, but had emphasized that it would not get into “pricing or suitability” of the jets. The bench had made clear that its direction to the Centre was issued to satisfy itself about the legitimacy of the decision-making process for procuring 36 Rafale fighter jets.

The directions were passed on October 10 on the two PILs filed by lawyers ML Sharma and Vineet Dhanda. The top court, however, had observed that the averments made in the two PILs were “grossly inadequate” and had said that it was not issuing the notice on them.

The Centre had, last week, filed the papers concerning the decision-making process with the Supreme Court’s registry in a sealed cover.

On Wednesday, as the SC bench, headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and also comprising Justices UU Lalit and KM Joseph, began its proceedings in the two PILs filed over the Rafale Deal controversy – by petitioners ML Sharma, who has named Prime Minister Narendra Modi as the respondent in the case, and Vineet Dhanda – it noted that since the last date of hearing in the matter, two more litigations on the subject had been received by the court – one by former BJP leaders Arun Shourie, Yashwant Sinha and advocate Prashant Bhushan and the other by Aam Aadmi Party MP Sanjay Singh.

Sinha and Shourie – both former Union ministers – and Bhushan have sought registration of an FIR into the fighter jet deal between India and France alleging “criminal misconduct” by high public functionaries. The trio has also sought a direction to CBI to investigate the offences mentioned in their complaint in a “time-bound” manner and submit periodic status reports to the apex court.

AAP MP Sanjay Singh, in his separate plea filed through lawyer Dheeraj Kumar Singh, has sought setting up of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) under the supervision of the apex court to probe the Rafale deal.

He has sought that the SIT should probe the reasons for cancellation of earlier deal entered into by the UPA government for the purchase of 126 fighter jets.

On October 10, the bench had sought from the Attorney General the details of the steps involved in the decision leading to the new deal. The CJI led bench had then clarified that the details so sought would not cover the pricing or the suitability of the equipment for the Indian Air Force, bearing in mind the sensitive nature of the matter.

The Court also directed the government to hand over the details of the decision-making process of the deal to the petitioners.

The Attorney General objected to sharing of details of the deal including its pricing, by stating that it would be covered under the Official Secrets Act. Considering the objection, the Court said that whatever documents that could be legitimately produced in public domain should be given to the petitioners and all other documents covered under the Official Secrets Act should be given to the Court in a sealed cover.

So far, the court had not sought this detail from the Centre.

When Bhushan pressed for CBI probe, the CJI replied: “For CBI probe, you have to wait.”

The top court, which has now fixed the matter for hearing on November 14, said documents considered strategic and confidential may not be shared.

The PIL alleges that in the Rafale deal there is prima facie evidence of the commission of cognizable offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act by public servants occupying the highest of public offices in the country. Though the petitioners had filed a complaint on October 4 before the CBI alleging foul play in Rafale deal, no action has been taken.

India News

Omar Abdullah criticises Martyrs’ Day restrictions, calls LG administration temporary guests

Omar Abdullah criticised the LG administration after being prevented from visiting Srinagar’s Martyrs’ Graveyard, alleging the 1931 martyrs’ sacrifices are being overlooked.

Published

on

Omar Abdullah

Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah on Monday criticised the Lieutenant Governor (LG) administration after he was prevented from visiting the Martyrs’ Graveyard in Srinagar to pay tribute to those killed during the 1931 uprising.

The area surrounding the Martyrs’ Graveyard in downtown Srinagar was sealed by the authorities, with police declaring it a no-go zone and restricting entry to the site.

Omar Abdullah questions restrictions

Unable to visit the graveyard, Abdullah, along with his ministers, MLAs and National Conference leaders, held a tribute meeting at the party headquarters in Srinagar.

Addressing party workers after the meeting, the Chief Minister said the administration’s decision to block access would not erase the memory of the 1931 martyrs.

Calling the LG administration “temporary guests”, Abdullah said those responsible for preventing political leaders from paying homage would not remain in office forever, while the martyrs’ cemetery would continue to stand. He added that he and his party would visit the site in the future to offer floral tributes and prayers.

Alleges selective treatment of history

Abdullah alleged that the sacrifices of those who fought against British-era rule in Jammu and Kashmir were being ignored because they were Muslims and had opposed the Dogra Maharaja, who ruled under British paramountcy.

He argued that the 1931 movement was not based on religion but represented a struggle for democratic rights, principles and freedom during the British period.

The Chief Minister also said attempts were being made to portray participation in the freedom movement against British rule in a negative light.

Background of the annual observance

July 13 was earlier observed as a public holiday in the erstwhile state of Jammu and Kashmir. Every year, officials, political leaders and members of the public would gather at the Martyrs’ Graveyard to pay homage to those killed during the 1931 incident, with police also offering a ceremonial gun salute.

Following the abrogation of Article 370 and the reorganisation of Jammu and Kashmir into a Union Territory in 2019, July 13 was removed from the list of official public holidays. Since then, authorities have not permitted official or public commemorative events at the graveyard.

The Lieutenant Governor continues to exercise authority over key subjects in the Union Territory, including law and order and policing.

Why July 13 is significant

July 13 commemorates the deaths of 22 civilians who were killed in police firing outside Srinagar Central Jail in 1931 while protesting against the rule of Dogra Maharaja Hari Singh during the British era.

The protesters had gathered in support of Abdul Qadeer, who had urged Kashmiris to oppose the Maharaja’s administration.

The incident led to widespread protests and prompted the Maharaja and the British administration to appoint commissions to examine the grievances of the Valley’s Muslim population. It also contributed to political reforms, with Jammu and Kashmir holding its first Assembly elections in 1934, marking the beginning of an electoral process in the region.

Changes after 2019

Since 2020, both July 13 and December 5—the birth anniversary of former Jammu and Kashmir Prime Minister and Chief Minister Sheikh Abdullah—have ceased to be official holidays in the Union Territory.

Instead, the birth anniversary of Dogra ruler Maharaja Hari Singh is now observed as a public holiday in Jammu and Kashmir.

Continue Reading

India News

Omar Abdullah hits back at BJP over Rs 100 crore legal notice, says party is hiding behind court

Omar Abdullah has responded to the BJP’s Rs 100 crore legal notice, accusing the party of avoiding political debate and announcing legal action against BJP leaders.

Published

on

Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister Omar Abdullah on Monday responded sharply after receiving a Rs 100 crore legal notice from the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), accusing the party of avoiding a political confrontation by taking the matter to court.

The BJP’s notice demands that Abdullah either apologise or provide evidence to support his allegation that BJP leaders had offered between Rs 20 crore and Rs 30 crore to National Conference (NC) legislators to persuade them to switch sides.

Omar Abdullah calls legal notice a ‘love letter’

Speaking to reporters in Srinagar, Abdullah said he had received an electronic copy of the legal notice and described it as a “love letter” from the BJP.

He said he viewed the notice as a sign that the BJP considered him a significant political opponent.

“I am perhaps the only politician who has been bestowed with a ‘love letter’ like this by the BJP. I consider this a mark of respect that I am obviously a political force they cannot ignore,” Abdullah said.

Says BJP chose court over political response

Abdullah criticised the BJP for pursuing legal action instead of responding politically to his allegations.

He said he deliberately made the remarks at a political event rather than in the Assembly, where statements are protected from legal challenge, because he expected a political rebuttal.

According to Abdullah, the BJP’s decision to approach the court reflected its style of handling political disputes.

National Conference to initiate legal action

The Chief Minister also announced that the National Conference would begin issuing legal notices to BJP leaders in Jammu and Kashmir over what he described as unfounded and defamatory allegations against his party.

He said senior BJP leaders had been making slanderous remarks against the National Conference over the past few months and that the party would now respond through legal channels.

Abdullah added that the National Conference would serve legal notices to those leaders and see how the legal process unfolds.

Continue Reading

India News

Mamata Banerjee slaps party worker amid chaotic Kolkata protest rally

Mamata Banerjee’s Kolkata protest march over the Baruipur rape-murder case turned chaotic after clashes with BJP workers and a viral incident in which she slapped a party worker.

Published

on

Mamta banerjee slaps own party worker

West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee’s protest march in Kolkata on Wednesday witnessed dramatic scenes after she slapped a member of her own party while attempting to disperse a crowd gathered outside her residence following the rally.

The protest march was organised against the alleged rape and murder of an 11-year-old girl in Baruipur. The rally was held after the Calcutta High Court allowed it, despite the Kolkata Police initially denying permission.

Rally witnesses repeated clashes

According to reports, the procession faced repeated disruptions as Trinamool Congress and BJP workers allegedly engaged in pushing and shoving along the rally route. Security personnel intervened to control the situation and reportedly carried out a baton charge to disperse the crowd.

BJP supporters also allegedly attempted to stop the march by forming a human chain and raised slogans of “chor, chor” (thief) during the protest. Some Trinamool workers were also reportedly targeted with eggs during the rally.

Slap incident caught attention

The most talked-about moment came after the rally concluded near Mamata Banerjee’s residence.

A large crowd had gathered outside the house, prompting the Chief Minister to step forward to clear the area. During the commotion, she slapped a party worker and pushed away several others while trying to restore order. Videos of the incident quickly circulated on social media.

Mamata Banerjee accuses BJP of planned disruption

Following the rally, Mamata Banerjee accused the BJP of deliberately attempting to disrupt the protest despite the court granting permission for the event.

She alleged that women workers from her party were assaulted and several supporters suffered injuries during the clashes. Banerjee also claimed that BJP supporters organised a motorcycle rally near her residence, played loud music throughout the protest route and snatched microphones that had been permitted for use during the march.

The Chief Minister further alleged that the Kolkata Police remained passive during the disturbances and accused them of behaving like BJP workers.

BJP rejects allegations

The BJP dismissed Mamata Banerjee’s accusations.

State BJP president Samik Bhattacharya said the party had not prevented Banerjee from holding the march. However, he criticised the Trinamool Congress, alleging that it had failed to change West Bengal’s political culture despite being in power for years.

Court had modified rally route

The Kolkata Police had initially refused permission for the protest march. However, the Calcutta High Court later permitted the rally while modifying its proposed route to minimise inconvenience to the public.

The protest was organised in response to the alleged rape and murder of an 11-year-old girl in Baruipur. The main accused, Prabhas Mondal, was later killed in a police encounter, while four people have been arrested in connection with the case.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com