ICICI Bank, SBI, HDFC among top victims of over Rs 2.05 lakh cr frauds in 11 years: RBI

Mar 18: Madhya Pradesh Congress Party sought in the Supreme Court on Wednesday that the trust vote in the state assembly be deferred till by-polls for the vacant seats are concluded, saying "heavens are not going to fall" if its government led by Kamal Nath is allowed to remain in office till then.

A bench, comprising Justices D Y Chandrachud and Hemant Gupta, was hearing cross petitions filed by former Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister and senior BJP leader Shivraj Singh Chouhan and MP Congress on the ongoing political crisis in the state after 22 rebel MLAs of the ruling combine purportedly offered to resign.

"Heavens are not going to fall if Congress government is allowed to continue till by-polls and the Shivraj Singh Chouhan's government must not be saddled on the people," said senior advocate Dushyant Dave, appearing for Congress.

"Let them face re-elections and then hold trust vote... You (BJP) have engineered it. My petition raises the frontal attack that you have launched a conspiracy," he said.

Senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Chouhan, vociferously opposed the submission saying that the party which killed the democracy by imposing emergency in 1975 is now referring to "lofty ideals" of B R Ambedkar.

He said that after the resignations of 22 Congress MLAs, out of which six resignations have been accepted, the state government should not be allowed to continue even for a day.

"It is lust of power because of which all these lofty arguments are being made.

"It is unheard of that a person who had lost majority says that he wants to continue for six months and there should be re-election before the trust vote.

Rohatgi said the Kamal Nath government wanted to stay in power by hook or crook.

Earlier in the day, the Madhya Pradesh Congress told the bench that a probe is needed on the resignation letters of its rebel MLAs that have been submitted by BJP leaders to the Speaker of the state Assembly.

Dave said the Governor has no business to send messages at night asking the Chief Minister or Speaker to hold floor test.

"The Speaker is the ultimate master and the Madhya Pradesh Governor is overriding him," he said.

The party alleged that resignations of its rebel MLAs were extracted by force and coercion and they did not act as per their free will.

It also said that its rebel MLAs were taken away in chartered flights and are currently incommunicado in a resort arranged by the BJP.

The advancing of arguments will resume after lunch.

The Madhya Pradesh Congress Legislature party (MPCLP) had Tuesday moved the Supreme Court seeking direction to the Centre and the BJP-led Karnataka government to grant it access to communicate with its rebel MLAs allegedly kept at Bengaluru.

Earlier on Tuesday, the court had asked the Kamal Nath government in the state earlier in the day to respond by Wednesday to a plea by senior BJP leader Shivraj Singh Chouhan seeking immediate floor test in the Assembly.

MPCLP, in its plea filed by Govind Singh, an MLA and chief whip of Congress legislature party, urged the apex court to declare as illegal the action of the Centre, Karnataka government and the MP BJP of illegally confining its MLAs in Bangaluru.

The plea, filed through senior lawyer Devdutt Kamat, said the trust vote would be a "sham" if 22 MLAs did not take part in it as almost 10 per cent of constituencies go unrepresented.

The plea filed by Chouhan and nine BJP lawmakers was moved in the top court just after the Speaker cited coronavirus concerns and adjourned the House till March 26 without taking the floor test apparently defying the directions of Governor Lalji Tandon.

The plea alleged that the Speaker, the Chief Minister and the Principal Secretary of the Assembly have "flagrantly violated the constitutional principles and have deliberately and wilfully defied the directions" issued by the governor asking the government to prove the majority on the floor of the house on March 16 when when the budget session was to commence.

On Saturday night, Tandon wrote to Nath asking him to seek a trust vote in the Assembly soon after the Governor's address on Monday, saying his government was in minority.

After the Speaker accepted the resignation of six Congress MLAs on Saturday, the party now has 108 legislators.

These include 16 rebel legislators who have also put in their papers but their resignations are yet to be accepted.

The BJP has 107 seats in the House, which now has an effective strength of 222, with the majority mark being 112.

New Delhi, Mar 6: Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman on Friday will move the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Second Amendment) Bill, 2019 for consideration and passing in Lok Sabha.

In December last year, the Union Cabinet had approved a proposal to promulgate an ordinance to amend the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) 2016.

The amendments will remove certain ambiguities in the IBC 2016 and ensure smooth implementation of the code, an official statement said.

The move is aimed at easing the insolvency resolution process and promoting the ease of doing business. Aimed at streamlining of the insolvency resolution process, the amendments seek to protect last-mile funding and boost investment in financially-distressed sectors.

Under the amendments, the liability of a corporate debtor for an offence committed before the corporate insolvency resolution process will cease.

The debtor will not be prosecuted for an offence from the date the resolution plan has been approved by the adjudicating authority if a resolution plan results in change in the management or control of the corporate debtor to a person who was not a promoter or in the management or control of the corporate debtor or a related party of such a person.

The amendments are aimed at providing more protection to bidders participating in the recovery proceedings and in turn boosting investor confidence in the country's financial system.

Mar 3: Just hours after the ending of a week-long “reduction” in violence that was crucial for Donald Trump’s peace deal in Afghanistan, the Taliban struck again: On Monday, they killed three people and injured about a dozen at a football match in Khost province. This resumption of violence will not surprise anyone actually invested in peace for that troubled country. The point of the U.S.-Taliban deal was never peace. It was to try and cover up an ignominious exit for the U.S., driven by an election-bound president who feels no responsibility toward that country or to the broader region.

Seen from South Asia, every point we know about in the agreement is a concession by Trump to the Taliban. Most importantly, it completes a long-term effort by the U.S. to delegitimize the elected government in Kabul — and, by extension, Afghanistan’s constitution. Afghanistan’s president is already balking at releasing 5,000 Taliban prisoners before intra-Afghan talks can begin — a provision that his government did not approve.

One particularly cringe-worthy aspect: The agreement refers to the Taliban throughout  as “the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan that is not recognized by the United States as a state and is known as the Taliban.” This unwieldy nomenclature validates the Taliban’s claim to be a government equivalent to the one in Kabul, just not the one recognised at the moment by the U.S. When read together with the second part of the agreement, which binds the U.S. to not “intervene in [Afghanistan’s] domestic affairs,” the point is obvious: The Taliban is not interested in peace, but in ensuring that support for its rivals is forbidden, and its path to Kabul is cleared.

All that the U.S. has effectively gotten in return is the Taliban’s assurance that it will not allow the soil of Afghanistan to be used against the “U.S. and its allies.” True, the U.S. under Trump has shown a disturbing willingness to trust solemn assurances from autocrats; but its apparent belief in promises made by a murderous theocratic movement is even more ridiculous. Especially as the Taliban made much the same promise to an Assistant Secretary of State about Osama bin Laden while he was in the country plotting 9/11.

Nobody in the region is pleased with this agreement except for the Taliban and their backers in the Pakistani military. India has consistently held that the legitimate government in Kabul must be the basic anchor of any peace plan. Ordinary Afghans, unsurprisingly, long for peace — but they are, by all accounts, deeply skeptical about how this deal will get them there. The brave activists of the Afghan Women’s Network are worried that intra-Afghan talks will take place without adequate representation of the country’s women — who have, after all, the most to lose from a return to Taliban rule.

But the Pakistani military establishment is not hiding its glee. One retired general tweeted: “Big victory for Afghan Taliban as historic accord signed… Forced Americans to negotiate an accord from the position of parity. Setback for India.” Pakistan’s army, the Taliban’s biggest backer, longs to re-install a friendly Islamist regime in Kabul — and it has correctly estimated that, after being abandoned by Trump, the Afghan government will have sharply reduced bargaining power in any intra-Afghan peace talks. A deal with the Taliban that fails also to include its backers in the Pakistani military is meaningless.

India, meanwhile, will not see this deal as a positive for regional peace or its relationship with the U.S. It comes barely a week after Trump’s India visit, which made it painfully clear that shared strategic concerns are the only thing keeping the countries together. New Delhi remembers that India is not, on paper, a U.S. “ally.” In that respect, an intensification of terrorism targeting India, as happened the last time the U.S. withdrew from the region, would not even be a violation of Trump’s agreement. One possible outcome: Over time the government in New Delhi, which has resolutely sought to keep its ties with Kabul primarily political, may have to step up security cooperation. Nobody knows where that would lead.

The irresponsible concessions made by the U.S. in this agreement will likely disrupt South Asia for years to come, and endanger its own relationship with India going forward. But worst of all, this deal abandons those in Afghanistan who, under the shadow of war, tried to develop, for the first time, institutions that work for all Afghans. No amount of sanctimony about “ending America’s longest war” should obscure the danger and immorality of this sort of exit.