Hope no Kejriwal will emerge from my movement again: Anna Hazare

Chennai, Jan 19: Amid ongoing nationwide protests against Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019, finance minister Nirmala Sitharaman on Sunday said that as many as 2838 people from Pakistan were given citizenship during the last six years.

"In the last six years, as many as 2838 Pakistani refugees, 914 Afghan refugees, 172 Bangladeshi refugees including Muslims have been given Indian citizenship. From 1964 to 2008, more than 4,00,000 Tamils (from Sri Lanka) have been given Indian citizenship," Sitharaman said at 'Programme on Citizenship (Amendment) Act, 2019' event here.

She added, "Till 2014, over 566 Muslims from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan were given Indian citizenship. During 2016-18 under Modi government, around 1595 Pakistani migrants and 391 Afghanistani Muslims were given Indian citizenship."

The minister, further, said, "It was also during the same period in 2016, that Adnan Sami was given Indian citizenship, this is an example."    

Sitharaman added that people who came from East Pakistan have been settled at various camps in the country.

"They are still there and it's been 50-60 years now. If you visit these camps, your heart will cry. The situation is the same with Sri Lankan refugees who continue to live in camps. They're barred from getting basic facilities," she said.

Asserting that the government is not snatching away anyone's citizenship, the BJP leader said: "This Citizenship (Amendment) Act is an attempt to provide people with a better life. We are not snatching away anyone's citizenship, we are only providing them that."

"The National Population Register (NPR) will be updated every 10 years and is not involved with the National Register of Citizens (NRC). Some are involved in raising false allegations and triggering people unnecessarily without any base," she added.

New Delhi, Apr 11: Ahead of Prime Minister Narendra Modi's meeting with chief ministers, senior Congress leader P Chidambaram on Saturday urged CMs of states where the party is in power to unanimously demand for transfer of cash to every poor family.

He said the poor have lost their jobs and have exhausted their savings. They are now standing in lines to get free food, the former Union finance minister said.

Chidambaram said remonetising the poor would cost only Rs 65,000 crore, which is economically viable.

"Chief ministers Amarinder Singh, Ashok Gehlot, Bhupesh Baghel, V Narayanasami, Uddhav Thackeray and E Palaniswani should tell the prime minister today that just as LIVES are important LIVELIHOOD of the poor is important, he tweeted.

"The poor have lost their jobs or self-employment in the last 18 days. They have exhausted their meagre savings. Many are standing in line for food," Chidambaram said.

Can the state stand by and watch them go hungry," he asked, adding that chief ministers should demand that cash be transferred to every poor family immediately.

"Remonetise the poor should be their unanimous demand," Chidambaram said.

London, Feb 14: Liquor tycoon Vijay Mallya once again asked the Indian banks to take back 100 per cent of the principal amount owed to them at the end of his three-day British High Court appeal on Thursday against an extradition order to India.

The 64-year-old former Kingfisher Airlines boss, wanted in India on charges of fraud and money laundering amounting to an alleged Rs 9,000 crores in unpaid bank loans, said the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) are fighting over the same assets and not treating him reasonably in the process.

“I request the banks with folded hands, take 100 per cent of your principal back, immediately,” he said outside the Royal Courts of Justice in London.

“The Enforcement Directorate attached the assets on the complaint by the banks that I was not paying them. I have not committed any offenses under the PMLA (Prevention of Money Laundering Act) that the Enforcement Directorate should suo moto attach my assets," he said.

"I am saying, please banks take your money. The ED is saying no, we have a claim over these assets. So, the ED on the one side and the banks on the other are fighting over the same assets,” he added.

Asked about heading back to India, he noted: “I should be where my family is, where my interests are.

"If the CBI and the ED are going to be reasonable, it’s a different story. What all they are doing to me for the last four years is totally unreasonable.”

Lord Justice Stephen Irwin and Justice Elisabeth Laing, the two-member bench presiding over the appeal, concluded hearing the arguments in the case and said they will be handing down their verdict at a later date after considering the oral as well as written submissions in the “very dense” case over the next few weeks.

On a day of heated arguments between Mallya’s barrister, Clare Montgomery, and Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) counsel Mark Summers, arguing on behalf of the Indian government, both sides clashed over the prima facie case of fraud and deception against Mallya.

“We submit that he lied to get the loans, then did something with the money he wasn’t supposed to and then refused to give back the money. All this could be perceived by a jury as patently dishonest conduct,” said Summers.

“What they [Kingfisher Airlines] were saying [to the banks] about profitability going forward was knowingly wrong,” he said, as he took the High Court through evidence to counter Mallya’s lawyers’ claims that Westminster Magistrates Court Judge Emma Arbuthnot had fallen into error when she found a case to answer in the Indian courts against Mallya.

Mallya, who remains on bail on an extradition warrant, is not required to attend the hearings but has been in court to observe the proceedings since the three-day appeal opened on Tuesday. A key defence to disprove a prima facie case of fraud and misrepresentation on his part has revolved around the fact that Kingfisher Airlines was the victim of economic misfortune alongside other Indian airlines.

However, the CPS has argued that “there is enough in the 32,000 pages of overall evidence to fulfil the [extradition] treaty obligations that there is a case to answer”. “There is not just a prima facie case but overwhelming evidence of dishonesty… and given the volume and depth of evidence the District Judge [Arbuthnot] had before her, the judgment is comprehensive and detailed with the odd error but nothing that impacts the prima facie case,” said Summers.

At the start of the appeal, Mallya’s counsel claimed Arbuthnot did not look at all of the evidence because if she had, she would not have fallen into the multiple errors that permeate her judgment. The High Court must establish if the magistrates’ court had in fact fallen short on a point of law in its verdict in favour of extradition.

Representatives from the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), as well as the Indian High Commission in London, have been present in court to take notes during the course of the appeal hearing.

Mallya had received permission to appeal against his extradition order signed off by former UK home secretary Sajid Javid last February only on one ground, which challenges the Indian government's prima facie case against him of fraudulent intentions in acquiring bank loans.

At the end of a year-long extradition trial at Westminster Magistrates’ Court in London in December 2018, Judge Arbuthnot had found “clear evidence of dispersal and misapplication of the loan funds” and accepted a prima facie case of fraud and a conspiracy to launder money against Mallya, as presented by the CPS on behalf of the Indian government.

Mallya remains on bail since his arrest on an extradition warrant in April 2017 involving a bond worth 650,000 pounds and other restrictions on his travel while he contests that ruling.