Modi govt’s minister Giriraj Singh booked in land grabbing case

News Network
February 8, 2018

In a fresh embarrassment to Prime Minister Narendra Modi-led NDA government at the Centre, Giriraj Singh, Minister for Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises, has been booked in a case of land grabbing along with 32 others in Danapur of Patna district.

On the direction of the Patna Civil court an FIR (NO: 54 / 2018) was lodged at the Danapur police station, on the outskirts of Patna against Mr. Singh, who is a BJP MP from Nawada in Bihar, allegedly for forcibly grabbing over 2 acres of land. Along with Mr. Singh 32 other persons too have been named in the case.

Resident of Asopur village in Danapur Ram Narayan Prasad had, earlier, petitioned in the SC/ST special court that 33 persons, including Mr. Singh had conspired to grab his over 2 acres of land for sale and purchase.

Danapur police station officer-in-charge Sandeep Kumar said that a case has been lodged against 33 persons, including Giriraj Singh under various sections of IPC and SC / ST as well.

Meanwhile, Opposition Rashtriya Janata Dal has demanded Mr. Singh’s resignation.

“Will Bihar CM Nitish Kumar or his deputy in the cabinet Sushil Kumar Modi ask Giriraj Singh to resign from his post…he is the same Giriraj Singh from whose house crores of rupees were seized after he had become minister in the Narendra Modi cabinet”, charged leader of opposition, Tejaswi Yadav.

Mr. Yadav also questioned the stance taken by Chief Minister Nitish Kumar and his deputy Sushil Modi on the issue. “Would he now break the coalition with the BJP or, he would resign from his post on the call of his conscienc?. Why is country’s biggest afwah mian (rumor master), Sushil Modi keeping quiet on the issue of Giriraj Singh?”, asked the RJD leader.

Comments

Kumar
 - 
Thursday, 8 Feb 2018

Why only this hate monger.  You will find many many more.  95 percent of bjp ministers are looters/decoits/killers/goondas etc etc.  One looter in karnataka is trying to come back to power once again.  Will SC take any action on this land grabber.   SC should seize all his bank accounts and properties.  there might me many properties registered in his close relative names.  SC should investigate this and make it open to public.  However, we should not expect any comments from our non-resident PM. 

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.
Agencies
January 24,2020

New Delhi, Jan 24: The Election Commission of India on Friday told the Supreme Court that its 2018 direction asking poll candidates to declare their criminal antecedents in electronic and print media has not helped curb criminalisation of politics. The poll panel suggested that instead of asking candidates to declare criminal antecedents in the media, political parties should be asked not to give tickets to candidates with criminal background.

A bench of Justices R F Nariman and S Ravindra Bhat asked the ECI to come up with a framework within one week which can help curb criminalisation of politics in nation's interest.

The top court asked the petitioner BJP leader and advocate Ashiwini Upadhyay and the poll panel to sit together and come up with suggestions which would help him in curbing criminalisation of politics.

In September 2018, a five-judge Constitution bench had unanimously held that all candidates will have to declare their criminal antecedents to the Election Commission before contesting polls and had called for a wider publicity, through print and electronic media about antecedents of candidates.

Comments

Satya Vishwasi
 - 
Saturday, 25 Jan 2020

What about those criminals who were already in parliament and vidahan sabhas? shall the ECI cancel their positions?

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
March 3,2020

Chennai, Mar 3: The Madras High Court has ruled that if a working woman gives birth to a child in the second delivery after twins in the first, she is not entitled to maternity benefits as it should be treated as third child.

"As per existing rules, a woman can avail such benefits only for her first two deliveries. Even otherwise it is debatable as to whether the delivery is not a second delivery but a third one, in as much as ordinarily when twins are born they are delivered one after another, and their age and their inter-se elderly status is also determined by virtue of the gap of time between their arrivals, which amounts to two deliveries and not one simultaneous act," the court said.

The first bench, comprising Chief Justice A P Sahi and Justice Subramonium Prasad stated this while allowing the appeal from Ministry of Home Affairs.

It set aside the order June 18 2019 order of a single Judge, who extended 180 days of maternity leave and other benefits to a woman member of the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) under the rules governing the Tamil Nadu government servants.

The issue pertains to an appeal moved by the ministry, which contended that the leave claim is by a member of CISF to whom the maternity rules of Tamil Nadu would not apply.

She would be covered by the maternity benefits as provided under the Central Civil Services (Leave) Rules, the ministry said.

When the appeal came up for hearing, the bench said it found that a second delivery, which, in the present case, resulted in a third child, cannot be interpreted so as to add to the mathematical precision that is defined in the rules.

The admissibility of benefits would be limited if the claimant has not more than two children, the bench said "This fact therefore changes the entire nature of the relief which is sought for by the woman petitioner, which aspect has been completely overlooked by the single judge", the bench said.

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
March 28,2020

Mar 28: A 69-year-old patient, hailing from Chullikal in Ernakulam District, passed away at Kalamasserry Medical College at 8:00am.

The patient had come from Dubai recently and was quarantined.

He arrived in Kerala on March 16 and was tested positive for Coronavirus on March 22, Medical College nodal officer A Fathahudeen said.

He was undergoing treatment for heart ailment and blood pressure. He had earlier undergone a bypass surgery.

Forty nine passengers in the flight he came are under quarantine.

A close relative and the driver who picked him up from the airport are coronavirus positive.

Since the deceased had no contact with any others in the state since his arrival, his route map was not processed.

Kerala reported 39 fresh cases of coronavirus on Friday, taking the total number of people under treatment to 164. The total number of confirmed cases from the state is 176, but, of this, 12 had recovered.

Of the 39 cases, 34 are from the worst affected northernmost district of Kasaragod, two from Kannur and one each from Thrissur, Kozhikode and Kollam.

With a positive case being reported from Kollam, all 14 districts in the state have been affected by the pandemic.

The worst affected Kasaragod has 76 positive cases, the highest and most of the affected are Non Resident Keralites from the Gulf.

A total of 1,10,299 people are under surveillence and 616 are in isolation wards of various hospitals.

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.