Alok Verma ouster: Kharge dissents, questions CVC findings

Agencies
January 11, 2019

New Delhi, Jan 11: Congress leader Mallikarjun Kharge submitted a dissent note before the High Powered Committee, which decided the ouster of Alok Verma as the CBI Director, questioning the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC) findings against Verma.

Kharge, the lone dissenting voice in the high-powered selection committee in his note argued, why Verma should be restored with "full extent and authority of powers" under his office.

Verma was removed as the CBI Director on account of the extremely serious nature of observations made by the CVC against him. The CVC was of the view that being the head of a very sensitive organisation, Verma was not functioning with the integrity expected of him.

"CVC (Central Vigilance Commission) report submitted to the Supreme Court doesn't arrive at any conclusive finding with respect to allegations against him," Kharge's note accessed by ANI stated.

Kharge also demanded that Verma be allowed to continue as CBI Director for an additional period of 77 days to make up for the days lost when he was sent on leave.

"Having examined the contents of the CVC report, it is my considered opinion that Alok Verma be allowed to explain himself before this Committee, along with the charges made against him, prior to any decision being taken," the note further read.

A high-powered committee comprising Justice Sikri, Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Kharge met for over two hours on Thursday to decide the fate of Verma, who was reinstated by the Supreme Court earlier this week after he was sent on forced leave by the government.

Echoing similar sentiments, another senior Congress leader Kapil Sibal took to Twitter on Friday and wrote, "Alok Verma's removal. The Committee ensured the caged parrot did not fly away fearing the parrot might spill the beans by parroting the goings on in the corridors of power. The caged parrot will remain caged."

According to sources, the CVC found evidence of influencing of investigation in the Moin Qureshi case. There was also evidence of Verma taking bribe of Rs. 2 crore, the sources claimed.

The CVC was of the view that Verma's conduct in the case was "suspicious," and there was a "prima facie case" against him. The CVC also felt that the "entire truth will come out if a criminal investigation is ordered."

In the IRCTC case, the CVC felt that it can be reasonably concluded that Verma allegedly "deliberately excluded" a name from the FIR, for reasons "best known to him," the sources said.

The CVC found evidence against Verma in several other cases as well, the sources said, including instances of wilful non-production and fabrication of record. The Committee also took note of Verma's alleged attempts to induct officers of doubtful integrity in the CBI.

In response to the "insinuation" that he was not given a chance to be heard, the sources said that Verma was given an opportunity to present his case before the CVC in the presence of Retd. Justice Patnaik.

The Supreme Court also provided a copy of the CVC report to Verma's advocate, the sources claimed.

The Committee felt that as a detailed investigation, including criminal investigation, was necessary in some cases, Verma's continuation as CBI Director was not desirable, and he should be transferred, the sources mentioned.

Verma, a 1979-batch IPS officer, was posted as DG, Fire Services, Civil Defence, and Home Guards, two days after he was reinstated as the CBI Director by the Supreme Court. His reinstatement had come about two-and-a-half months after being divested of his powers and sent on leave by the government.

In his place, 1986-batch IPS officer M. Nageshwar Rao, who is Additional Director of CBI, will look after the duties of the Director, till the appointment of a new Director or until further orders, whichever is earlier, according to an order issued by the Department of Personnel and Training.

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.
Agencies
July 2,2020

Lucknow, Jul 2: Senior BJP leader Uma Bharti Thursday appeared in person before a special court here conducting trial in the 1992 Babri mosque demolition case.      

The special CBI court is currently recording the statements of 32 accused under CrPC section 313 (court's power to examine the accused), a stage in the trial that follows the examination of prosecution witnesses.

The 61-year-old saffron clad BJP leader is the 19th accused to depose before the court in the over 27-year-old case. Thirteen other alleged accused, including former deputy prime minister LK Advani and senior BJP leaders MM Joshi and Kalyan Singh are yet to be examined at this stage. Their lawyers have indicated to the CBI court that they prefer to appear through video conferencing. 

The mosque in Ayodhya was demolished in December 1992 by 'kar sevaks' who claimed that an ancient Ram temple had stood on the same site. The CBI court is conducting day-to-day hearings to complete the trial by August 31, as directed by the Supreme 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.
Agencies
July 23,2020

Expressing concern over the ban imposed on TikTok by the government of India, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has reportedly called the development in the south Asian country “worrisome”.

TikTok was amongst the 59 Chinese apps that were banned in India but why it hogs the maximum limelight because TikTok had the second-largest user base in India with over 200 million users.

As per The Verge writer Casey Newton, Zuckerberg was worried about TikTok’s India ban. Although it soon cashed into the opportunity and released a TikTok clone “Reels”, the government’s reason behind banning the app in India wasn’t received well by Mark Zuckerberg. 

He had said that if India can ban a platform with over 200 million users in India without citing concrete reasons, it can also ban Facebook if something goes amiss on the security and privacy front.

Why Mark finds it particularly worrisome because Facebook is already involved in a lot tussle with the governments across the world involving national security concerns. 

“Facebook already faces fights around the world from governments on both the left and the right related to issues that fit under the broad umbrella of national security: election interference, influence campaigns, hate speech, and even just plain-old democratic speech. Zuckerberg knows that the leap from banning TikTok on national security grounds to banning Facebook on national security grounds is more of a short hop,” the report by Casey read.

Facebook till now has not faced any kind of issue in India but considering the debacle with the other governments, it is not entirely wrong to worry about its future in India if any national security issue arises. Back in 2016, Facebook’s Free Basics service, which means a free but restricted internet service, was banned in India by the telecom regulators. 

The TRAI had said that the Free Basic services were banned in India because it violated the principles of net neutrality. With Free Basics services, Facebook had planned to bring more unconnected users online. But since 2016, there has been no major tussle between the Indian government and Zuckerberg due to national security issues.

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.
Agencies
February 6,2020

Bijnor, Feb 6: Apprehensions over the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) and the National Register of Citizens (NRC) are now so strong that a team of economic enumerators were allegedly manhandled in Uttar Pradesh's Bijnor district and faced stiff resistance from the people.

A team of the economic census enumerators in Bijnor, on Wednesday, sent a letter to the District Magistrate narrating the difficulties they are facing in some parts "due to misinformation".

District magistrate Ramakant Pandey, when contacted, said that he had asked the department concerned to complete the work on time. "If teams are facing any problems, we will sort it out at once. No hurdle in economic census will be tolerated," he said.

According to District Economic and Statistics Officer, Harendra Malik: "Our teams are facing protests in minority-dominated areas as people are linking it to the NRC. Some team members were manhandled.

"We have now asked village heads and municipality chairmen to help our teams in the survey and convince the people. Our teams are trying to convince them that it is a routine work which is being carried out for years. It has nothing to do with the NRC or CAA."

He further said that they plan to hold a series of meetings with people's representatives, including village heads and chairmen, so that they could put an end to this confusion.

The seventh economic census was flagged off in Bijnor by District Magistrate Ramakant Pandey on January 6. There are around 3,000 enumerators and 569 supervisors engaged in the census being carried out under the supervision of economic and statistics department. It is expected to be completed by March 31.

The economic census is aimed at collecting data about the financial status of people engaged in unorganised sector.

Meanwhile, the areas where the enumerators are facing stiff resistance include Kalhari village in Najibabad block, Amipur Narain village in Mohammadpur Devmal block, Anisa Nangli village in Dwarka block and the Mirzapur Bella village in Jalilpur block.

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.