Can't disclose Modi-Vajpayee letters during Guj riots: PMO

December 16, 2013

Modi-VajpayeeNew Delhi, Dec 15: The Prime Minister's Office has refused to disclose communication exchanged between former Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Chief Minister Narendra Modi during the 2002 Gujarat riots even after 11 years.

Responding to an RTI application, the Prime Minister's Office cited section 8(1)(h) of transparency, which exempts information that would impede the process of investigation or apprehension or prosecution of offenders.

The response raises questions whether the communication between Modi and then Prime Minister Vajpayee carried any information related to rioters or people behind the pogrom.

The RTI applicant had sought copy of all communications exchanged between the PMO and the Gujarat government between February 27, 2002 and April 30, 2002 on the law and order situation in the state.

The applicant had also sought copy of the communication exchanged between Vajpayee and Modi during that period which saw tense atmosphere in the state.

While refusing disclosure of information, the country's top office did not give any reasons as to how disclosure of information would attract section 8(1)(h) even though Delhi High Court has made it clear that cogent reasons be given while denying information under the clause.

"It is apparent that the mere existence of an investigation process cannot be a ground for refusal of the information; the authority withholding information must show satisfactory reasons as to why the release of such information would hamper the investigation process.

"Such reasons should be germane, and the opinion of the process being hampered should be reasonable and based on some material. Sans this consideration, Section 8(1)(h) and other such provisions would become the haven for dodging demands for information," Justice Ravindra Bhat had held.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
July 5,2020

Ahmedabad, Jul 5: A woman police sub-inspector (PSI) with Ahmedabad Police was arrested and sent to three-day police remand, on Saturday, for allegedly accepting a bribe of Rs 20 lakh from an Ahmedabad-based businessman — accused in two rape cases — in exchange for not applying a stringent act against him.

According to police officials, Shweta Jadeja, PSI and incharge of Mahila police station (West) in the city, was arrested by a team of Detection of Crime Branch (DCB) officials in Ahmedabad on Friday after the complainant in the case, the rape accused, approached the Crime Branch and stated that Jadeja had allegedly demanded Rs 35 lakh form him, in exchange for not booking him under the Prevention of Anti-Social Activities (PASA) Act.

The PASA Act in Gujarat gives power to the police to detain an accused and send them to a prison away from their native district. The complainant claimed that he already paid Rs 20 lakh of the total amount to Jadeja on February 3.

On Saturday, a sessions court awarded Jadeja a three-day remand with the Crime Branch, which will end at 11:30 am on July 7. Following this, the PSI will undergo a medical check-up and be presented before the magistrate again.

“We had originally demanded a seven-day remand. The accused officer has been sent to three-day remand for further investigation in the case,” said a senior police official in Ahmedabad.

According to police, complainant Kenal Shah — managing director of GSP Crop Science Private Limited, a crop solution-based company in Ahmedabad — is allegedly facing two separate rape cases under IPC section 376.

PSI Jadeja was first entrusted with the investigation of a rape case against Shah in January this year, lodged at Mahila police station (West).

The rape case complaint is of 2019. Another rape case against Shah was being probed by Assistant Commissioner of Police (Crimes Against Women), Mini Josef, wherein the investigation was reportedly completed.

As per the remand application report filed by the police, Jadeja had allegedly threatened Shah through his brother Bhavesh Shah — a joint managing director at GSP Crop Science Private Limited — and initially demanded Rs 25 lakh for not applying the PASA Act against the accused. The bribe amount was then settled at Rs 20 lakh and in February, the accused allegedly paid the amount via an office accountant to one Jayubha, allegedly a representative of Jadeja, from a finance office in Jamjodhpur area of Ahmedabad.

The report further stated that after the initial amount was paid, a third complaint was allegedly made against Kenal by a security officer at his office, Yograjsinh, for criminal intimidation. After the third complaint, PSI Jadeja had contacted Bhavesh again and demanded an additional sum of Rs 15 lakh for not applying the PASA Act against Kenal. The complaint from the security officer was not converted into an FIR and Shah has not been jailed yet.

However, It was after the demand of Rs 15 lakh that complainant Kenal approached the Crime Branch on June 27. An FIR was lodged against Jadeja at Ahmedabad DCB police station under sections seven and twelve of the Prevention of Corruption Act, charging her for “public servant taking gratification other than legal remuneration in respect of an official act”.

“Now that we have received the remand of the accused officer from the court, we will try to trace and recover the alleged Rs 20 lakh amount she received in this case,” said Deepan Bhadran, Deputy Commissioner of Police, Ahmedabad.

Shweta Jadeja is a PSI of the 2016-’17 batch and a resident of Vastrapur in Ahmedabad, while her native place is in Keshod of Junagadh district. The police have not recovered the bribe amount she allegedly accepted as of late Saturday.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
June 27,2020

New Delhi, Jun 27: Fuel prices were hiked by the oil marketing companies for the 21st day in a row on Saturday. Petrol and diesel will now cost Rs 80.38/litre and Rs 80.40/litre respectively in the national capital.

The price of petrol is increased by Rs 0.25 per litre while that of diesel by Rs 0.21 per litre.
Rates differ from state to state depending on the incidence of value-added tax (VAT).

Notably, oil marketing companies have been adjusting retail rates in line with costs after an 82-day break from rate revision amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. These firms on June 7 restarted revising prices in line with costs.

The Congress party had called the increase in the price of petrol and diesel 'unjust', 'thoughtless' and demanded from the Central government to roll back increase with immediate effect and pass on the benefit of low oil prices directly to the citizens of this country.
In an official statement, the Congress Working Committee (CWC) had said that no government should levy and impose such unacceptable strain on its people.

Before the nation entered the lockdown, the average price of petrol and diesel in Delhi was Rs 69.60 per litre and Rs 62.30 per litre respectively.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
April 9,2020

Patna, Apr 9: In a horrifying incident, a migrant woman was sexually abused in a Gaya hospital where she was kept in an isolation ward. Three days later, she died due to excessive bleeding.

The matter came to light on Tuesday when her mother-in-law informed the authorities concerned about the shocking incident.

The 25-year-old victim had returned to Bihar’s Gaya district from Ludhiana (in Punjab) along with her husband on March 25. Before returning to her in-laws’ place, she had undergone abortion at Ludhiana just when she was two months pregnant.

On reaching Gaya, she complained of excessive bleeding. Her husband admitted her to Anugrah Narain Magadh Medical College and Hospital (ANMMCH) on March 27 where she was kept in the emergency ward.

Later, on April 1, on being suspected to be coronavirus patient, she was kept in an isolation ward. Her family members alleged that it was in this isolation ward where a doctor attending to her overnight outraged her modesty for two successive nights on April 2 and 3.

“The following day, she was discharged from the hospital after her coronavirus test report was found to be negative. However, after returning home, she remained aloof and struck by fear. On questioning, she revealed how a doctor had sexually abused her in the isolation ward. On April 6, she passed away due to excessive bleeding,” said her mother-in-law.

On receiving the information, the local police asked the mother-in-law to come to the hospital on Tuesday and identify the doctor (about whom the victim had given a description). However, the accused was not identified.

“Prima facie, the matter is serious. We are verifying the allegations. We will dig out the CCTV footage in the hospital and take strict action after identifying the culprit,” said Dr VK Prasad, the hospital superintendent.

Meanwhile, the Gaya police have arrested two people who posed as doctors and entered the isolation ward using doctors’ kits. One of the apprehended people works in a private.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.