Swamy model lie exposed: Ministry says Priyanka, Karti have only one DIN

[email protected] (CD Network)
June 29, 2014

New Delhi, Jun 29: The credibility of senior BJP leader Subramanian Swamy, who is considered as one of the most controversial politicians in India, is once again at stake as his allegation against two prominent figures of opposition also proved to be false.

priyanka-karti-subbuPriyanka Gandhi and Karti Chidambaram have only one Director Identification Number (DIN) issued to them, Corporate Affairs Ministry has said contradicting the vociferous claim of senior Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Subramanian Swamy that they possessed multiple numbers.

The Ministry has also said that other DIN applications (online) made by them had "lapsed" or were "rejected" and not allotted to them. "Priyanka Gandhi, wife of Robert Vadra, is holding only one DIN allotted by Ministry. The DIN application was made online and processed by the DIN cell assisted by service provider company under MCA21.

"The valid DIN number... was allotted on her application dated January 10, 2007," Pankaj Srivastava, Assistant Central Public Information Officer, Office of Regional Director, NR, Noida said in an RTI response dated June 17, 2014 to Bhilwara- based RTI activist SS Ranawat.

"No penalty order was passed by this Directorate as the power to impose is vested with Courts under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956," the reply said in response to a question seeking a copy of any penalty orders imposed on her.

The issue was raised by Subramanian Swamy who had filed complaints against Priyanka Vadra and Karti Chidambaram with the Ministry alleging that the two had multiple DINs, which is not permissible under the Companies Law.

Karti Chidambaram is the son of former Finance Minister P Chidambaram.

In the case of Karti also, the Ministry said in its response that he is "holding only one DIN allotted by the Ministry. The DIN application was made online and processed by the DIN cell assisted by service provider company under MCA21."

"However, the DIN documents and related information are in the nature of personal information and the disclosure of which has no relationship to any public activity or interest or which would cause unwarranted invasion of the privacy of the individuals as prescribed under section 8(1)(j) of the Right to Information Act," it said.

Comments

SS Ranawat
 - 
Sunday, 29 Jan 2017

This news is totally fake. In fact both the persons have DI number more than one. I have sufficient documentary evidences, which PTI ignored for the reasons best known to them.

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
January 30,2020

Mangaluru, Jan 30: A dentist has been arrested by the Dakshina Kannada district police on charge of sexually harassing a woman patient during treatment at a hospital in Beltangady taluk.

The accused has been identified as Dr Sudhakar. He is facing charges under section 354, 354A(1)(I) of IPC.

The incident occurred yesterday when a local woman had been to the government hospital at Kasaba village in Beltangady for dental treatment.

According to the woman, Dr Sudhakar deliberately touched her body inappropriately and sexually harassed during treatment.

The shocked woman went to the jurisdictional Beltangady police station and lodged a complaint. The doctor was arrested and produced before the court.

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
May 10,2020

Karwar: The number of Covid-19 patients in Uttara Kannada district has gone up to 39 with seven more persons from Bhatkal testing positive for the virus on Sunday.

These seven persons include five men and two women. Among them, the youngest is 15 years and the eldest is 60 years. Rest of the patients are 50, 21, 16, 42, and 31 years old, a health bulletin said. All the new seven cases are contacts of the eight persons who were found positive on Saturday.

Of the new cases, one is an auto-rickshaw driver who had reportedly transported one of the patients. Now the administration is collecting the details of the driver’s journeys and the persons who had travelled in his auto-rickshaw. It is said that some of these persons who were confirmed positive on Sunday had travelled to Udupi and moved around in Bhatkal town to buy medicine.

The pressure on the administration is increasing with new positive cases being detected in Bhatkal town every day. After the first 11 cases, there were no new cases for 20 days. However, since Friday, there is sudden spike in the number of new cases in Bhatkal town.

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 29,2020

Bengaluru, Jul 29: The Karnataka High Court’s division bench of Chief Justice Abhay Oka and Justice H P Sandesh today rejected an application that wanted Amulya Leona’s case to be transferred from Karnataka Police to the National Investigation Agency (NIA).

The bench, while observing that extraordinary jurisdiction can’t be exercised for transferring the case to the NIA, asked “What is so special that investigation should be transferred to NIA?”

The court, in its previous hearing, had questioned the maintainability of the petition seeking transfer of the sedition case against Leona to the NIA.

According to the petitioner, advocate Pavana Chandra Shetty, the case is a serious matter against national integration and unity and has not been investigated properly by the police. The state police also failed to file the chargesheet within 90 days, he said, and also asked for cancellation of her bail.

The bench asked the petitioner as to how a bail, already granted to a person, can be cancelled. “Is it not the indefeasible right of the accused to be released on bail if chargesheet is not filed within stipulated time? How can you make a prayer for cancellation of bail?”  the Court asked.

The counsel for the petitioner also stated that in cases of a cognizable offence, when the chargesheet is purposely not filed within the stipulated time, the matter will have to transferred to the appropriate authority.

The court responded to his contention by asking him how could the court override law and cancel the bail. “Where is the question of cancellation of bail? Can we override the law and say that bail should be cancelled?” said the bench.

Advocate Vishal Raghu had filed the petition for transfer of Leona’s case, who was accused of raising pro-Pakistan slogans at an anti-CAA rally on February 20 at Freedom Park. The advocate had blamed the probe team for not filing a chargesheet on time and has asked the state government to approach the higher court against bail granted to Leona.

Bengaluru student Amulya Leona was charged with sedition for her actions in the presence of All India Majlis-e-Ittehad-ul-Muslimeen chief Asaduddin Owaisi. She was arrested by the Bengaluru police for allegedly shouting ‘Pakistan Zindabad’ slogans at an anti- CAA Protest in Bengaluru in February this year. On June 11, she was granted conditional bail by the Bengaluru civil court.

Her bail plea was earlier rejected by a Bengaluru court, after she had spent a three-month period in jail, stating that she may abscond if she is released. The sessions judge Vidhyadhar Shirahatti had also stated that if the petitioner is granted bail, she may abscond and may involve in similar offence which affects peace at large and hence her petition is liable to be rejected. The court had also noted that Amulya Leona is an influential person who may threaten and influence the witness and hamper the case in case of the prosecution and will abscond if released on bail.

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.