Jaitley's comments 'cheap': Yashwant Sinha

Agencies

September 29, 2017

New Delhi, Sept 29: BJP veteran Yashwant Sinha today accused Arun Jaitley of making "cheap" remarks and said the finance minister's criticism of his work amounted to criticism of the Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee who had entrusted him with key ministries.

In a dig at Jaitley over his "job applicant at 80" barb, Sinha said the finance minister did a great "disservice" to L K Advani as the first quoted the BJP veteran's advice that his remarks should be confined to issues and not involve personalities, and then went on to make a personal attack against him.

"So cheap is the remark that I consider it below my dignity to respond to it," Sinha told PTI.

He then went on to recount his decision to quit the IAS 12 years before his retirement to join politics and added that he "voluntarily" decided not to contest Lok Sabha election in 2014 when he was "certain" of his win as he wanted to quit electoral politics.

Asked if he would not contest elections now, he replied in the affirmative.

"He (Jaitley) has completely forgotten my background. I gave up the IAS when I had 12 years of service left to join public life. I refused to become a Minister of State in the V P Singh Cabinet in 1989 as I had some issues.

"I retired from electoral politics. I am not active in politics and am living a quiet life in my corner. So if I was looking for a post, then, first of all, I would not have given up all these things I gave up," he said.

Sinha also hit back at Jaitley and other BJP leaders for their criticism of his work as a finance minister under Vajpayee and said he was given the crucial external affairs ministry and became "even a more active member of the Cabinet Committee on Security".

Sinha said those were "challenging times" when he took over as the external affairs minister in July 2002.

"Following the terror attack on Parliament (in December 2001), India and Pakistan were eyeballs to eyeball on the border. To say that the external affairs ministry was a useless ministry and I was forced out of the finance ministry is a contradiction," he said.

This government, Sinha noted, has given the great honour of Bharat Ratna to Atal Bihari Vajpayee and BJP leaders then criticise him too.

He had presented five regular and two interim Union budgets, he said.

Asked about his response to the government's recent moves, including the constitution of the Economic Advisory Council, Sinha said, "Let's see what great pearls of wisdom they come out with. Nothing has happened so far, so I will wait for some action before I make my comments."

A newspaper article was written by Sinha on Wednesday in which he slammed the government's handling of the economy has sparked a raging political debate with opposition leaders coming out in his support while top ministers rejecting his criticism and insisting that the Indian economy remained strong and vibrant.

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.

Year of disappointment, disastrous management and diabolical pain: Cong on Modi govt anniversary

Agencies

May 30,2020

New Delhi, May 30: The Congress on Friday described the first year of the Modi government as a "year of disappointment, disastrous management and diabolical pain".

Congress leader K C Venugopal said the six years of the Modi dispensation have seen fraying of bonds of empathy, fraternity and brotherhood with increase in acts of communal and sectarian violence.

Congress chief spokesperson Randeep Surjewala said that at the end of six years, it appears the Modi government is at war with its people and is inflicting wounds on them, instead of healing them.

"It is inflicting wounds on Mother India," he said.

"This government is trying to fill coffers of the select rich and is inflicting pain on the poor," Surjewala said.

On the BJP's charge of the Congress playing politics over the COVID-19 crisis, Venugopal said the opposition party did not indulge in any politics and gave suggestions instead.

"Being a responsible opposition, it is our duty to raise the problems faced by the common people. As opposition, we highlighted the failures of the government," he said.

Venugopal said the government "is totally insensitive" to the plight of migrant labourers and farmers.

Surjewala also demanded that a virtual session of Parliament be convened immediately to discuss pressing issues and the due process be set in motion for holding of meetings of various parliamentary committees.

Modi and his cabinet had taken oath on this day last year for a second term in office.

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.

Muslim population rose in India because they got 'special rights': Yogi Adityanath

News Network

January 15,2020

Jan 15: Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath said on Tuesday that the Muslim population in India increased manifold since the partition because they were given special rights and facilities, according to a report by The Indian Express.

"The Muslim population in India has increased manifold since 1947, it has gone up by seven to eight times. No one has any objection. If they, as citizens of the country, work for development, they are welcome. Their population has increased because they have been given special rights and facilities. All possible steps were taken to ensure their growth," Adityanath said while addressing a rally in Gaya organised by the BJP in support of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act.

He asked the audience, "But what happened in Pakistan?" Claiming that the Hindu population in Pakistan had decreased since 1947, he asked why it was so.

Yogi said that the countrywide anti-CAA protests are a "conspiracy" hatched from afar by those resentful of a united and grand India and these are being aided by a "crooked" opposition. He further charged that those opposing the legislation were committing the "paap" (sin) of working against national interests.

"For taking such a step, Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah deserve acclaim. Instead, they are being attacked", Yogi lamented.

Comments

He himself contradicts his statements. He claims the Muslim population rose 8-9 (according to him) times since 1947. If he was educated its simple 73 years have passed the population grows. Still, the Muslim population is only a minority against the majority. He talks about special rights and facilities given yes agreed but not by him it's by the Constitution of India and for all the minorities. So it's not you its Constitution of India. The majority of the people are against the act CAA is against the very fundamental of the Constitution of India which PM & HM are taking away from the people. If you disagree, disrespect, go against it then you are against the country itself in Hindi deshdruhi.

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.

Bishop Franco Mulakkal granted bail in nun rape case

Agencies

August 7,2020

Kottayam, Aug 7: A trial court in Kottayam on Friday granted bail to Bishop Franco Mulakkal, accused of raping a nun in Kerala, with stringent conditions and directed him to be present on the dates of hearing of the case.

The Additional Sessions Court had cancelled the bail granted to the Bishop on July 13 for failing to appear for the trial and issued a Non Bailable Warrant against him.

Mulakkal was present in the Court on Friday when it considered the matter.

Granting bail, the court directed him not to leave the state till the chargesheet is read out to him on August 13 and to be present in court on the dates of hearing of the case.

The Court also directed him to offer fresh sureties and bail bonds.

On July 13, Mulakkal’s counsel had informed the court that his client could not appear as he had been in self quarantine due to his primary contact with a COVID-19 infected person.

The next day, the former Jalandhar Bishop had tested positive for coronavirus.

The prosecution informed the Court that Mulakkal had not produced the COVID negative certificate, to which the Court observed that the state Health Department can take necessary action on this issue.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday had directed Mulakkal to face trial as it dismissed his plea seeking discharge in the rape case lodged against him by the nun belonging to a congregation under Jalandhar diocese, saying there was no merit in his petition.

A bench of Chief Justice S A Bobde, A S Bopanna and V Ramasubramanian had told the counsel for Bishop that the court is not saying anything on merit, but is dismissing the plea on the issue of discharge from the case.

Mulakkal, in his plea had challenged the July 7 Kerala High Court order, dismissing his discharge plea in the rape case filed by the nun.

The High Court had asked the deposed Bishop of Jalandhar diocese to stand for trial in the rape case, which was registered on the basis of a complaint filed by the nun.

The senior priest of the Roman Catholic Church had filed the revision petition following the dismissal of his discharge plea by a trial court in March this year.

The rape case against the Bishop was registered by police in Kottayam district.

In her complaint to the police in June, 2018, the nun had alleged that she was subjected to sexual abuse by the bishop during the period between 2014 and 2016.

The bishop, who was arrested by the Special Investigation team, which probed the case, charged him with wrongful confinement, rape, unnatural sex and criminal intimidation.

Comments