10 years of UPA rule saw best decadal growth: P Chidambaram claims

New Delhi, Mar 6: As panicky depositors rushed to withdraw money from Yes Bank whose control was seized by the RBI in a dramatic late-night move, Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman on Friday assured depositors that their money is safe and said the central bank was working for an early resolution of the crisis.

The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) on Thursday evening capped withdrawals at Rs 50,000 for the next one month and imposed strict limits on operations at the country's fourth-largest private lender that faced "regular outflow of liquidity" after an effort to raise new capital failed.

"I am in continuous interaction with the RBI. The RBI is fully seized of the matter and has assured they will give a quick resolution," Sitharaman said here.

She said no depositor will lose his or her money and insisted that the immediate priority is to ensure Yes Bank customers are able to withdraw money within the stipulated cap.

"I want to assure every depositor that their money shall be safe. Their monies are safe," she said. "I am constantly in contact with the RBI and the steps that are taken are taken in the interest of depositors, banks and economy. We are fully seized of the development."

She was talking to reporters after meeting State Bank of India (SBI) Chairman Rajnish Kumar. On Thursday, the SBI board gave its "in-principle" approval to exploring investment opportunities in Yes Bank.

"So I repeat, the depositors can be assured that their money is safe," she said.

Soon after the RBI takeover, depositors thronged Yes Bank ATMs to withdraw money and police had to be deployed in some places to control the crowds.

Yes Bank has 1,000 branches across the country.

Refusing to elaborate on her meeting with the SBI chairman, the minister said that "was on a completely different matter".

"RBI governor has given me assurance that there will be an appropriate resolution soon. No depositor will lose (money)," she said. "Reserve Bank has taken cognizance of the problem."

The central bank, she said, has gone through the "process over and over again to find out an amicable solution".

"And that has been over the last couple of months. So it is not as if they have come in suddenly now. We have been monitoring the situation," she said adding the RBI has appointed an administrator who previously was with the SBI.

"Both the RBI and the government are looking at this with all the details before them, not just today. I have personally monitored the situation over the last couple of months with the RBI. Therefore we have taken a course which will be in everybody's interest," she added.

Yes Bank had been seeking new capital since last year to bolster its ratios and quell questions about its stability due to its exposure to the non-banking finance industry entangled in a prolonged crunch in the local credit market.

The SBI chairman said the resolution to the Yes Bank crisis will come "very shortly".

"This is not a sectoral problem. It is a bank-specific problem," he said. "The RBI will take all steps to ensure financial stability."

On SBI picking up a stake in Yes Bank, he said the lender already has an in-principle approval for doing so.

"If SBI has to pick up a stake in Yes Bank, we have an in-principle approval for that," he said.

Commenting on the crisis at Yes Bank, Alka Anbarasu, Vice President – Senior Credit Officer, Financial Institutions, Moody's Investors Service, said: "RBI's moratorium on Yes Bank is credit negative as it affects timely repayment of bank depositors and creditors."

"While Moody's expects Indian authorities will take steps to prevent the weakness in the bank's viability from significantly impacting its depositors and senior creditors, the lack of a coordinated and timely action highlights continued uncertainty around bank resolutions in India," she said.

New Delhi, May 8: The Supreme Court on Friday suggested that states should consider indirect sale and home delivery of liquor as per its statute and law to avoid crowding at liquor shops amid the ongoing coronavirus-induced lockdown.

A bench headed by Justice Ashok Bhushan refused to pass any orders on a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking clarity on the sale of liquor and to ensure social distancing while it is being sold in liquor shops during the lockdown.

"We will not pass any order but the states should consider indirect sale/home delivery of liquor to maintain social distancing norms and standards," Justice Ashok Bhushan said while disposing of the petition.

The PIL, filed by one Sai Deepak, sought directions for closure of liquor shops for failing to enforce social distancing, which is essential to prevent the spread of coronavirus.

The petitioner told the apex court that he only wants that the life of common people is not affected because of crowding at liquor shops during COVID-19.

Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, another judge in the bench, said that discussion on home delivery is already going on.

The top court, after hearing the petition complaining about flouting of safety norms at liquor shops, observed that it cannot pass any orders to different states but they should consider online sale and home delivery of liquor.

Jodhpur, Jun 5: A video has gone viral on social media showing what could be called Jodhpur's George Floyd moment with a twist, showing cops throwing a person on the ground and pressing his neck with their knees for roaming around without a mask.

However, unlike the unfortunate incident in Minneapolis, Minnesota, the cops in Jodhpur reportedly acted after the person, said to be mentally challenged, turned violent after being confronted by the police.

Dumb TV media is playing the initial part of this video as 'India's George Flyod moment'. Doesn't matter to them that the same video shows the man beating the cops back badly pic.twitter.com/vGSaON6oii

— Swati Goel Sharma (@swati_gs) June 5, 2020

George Floyd, a 46-year-old black man, died after being arrested by the police outside a shop in Minneapolis in the US on May 25. Footage showed a white officer, Derek Chauvin, kneeling on Floyd's neck for several minutes while he was pinned to the floor. He was pronounced dead later in the hospital, triggering widespread protests across the US.

However, in the Jodhpur incident, the man, identifed as Mukesh Kumar Prajapat, did not die but instead started fighting with the policemen.

Jodhpur police officers confirmed that the video was shot in the city on Thursday after the police wanted to issue a challan against the man for roaming on the streets without wearing a mask before he started manhandling the police.

The video shows a cop pressing his neck with his knee while two other cops held the young man's legs. A huge crowd gathered when the scuffle broke out.

Meanwhile, the SHO of Dev Nagar police station, Somkaran, said that the police were issuing a challan to Prajapat when he attacked them and tore their uniform. An FIR has been lodged against Prajapat on a complaint lodged by the Pratap Nagar police station. He will be produced in the court later in the day.

Prajapat is said to be mentally challenged and had damaged his father's eye earlier for which a case was registered against him, the poice said. Action is being initiated against Prajapat under the Epidemic Act, they added.