The Supreme Court, on January 14, issued notice in the plea filed against Madras High Court order transferring investigation of Thanjavur minor’s suicide case to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). The appeal has been filed by the Tamil Nadu Director General of Police who has maintained throughout that all directions of the court were duly followed and all investigation was going as per procedure.

The impugned order dated January 31, was passed in response to a petition filed by the father of the deceased girl who stated that he had lost confidence in the state police’s investigation after the school was exonerated by the state’s Education Department of allegations of attempted forcible religious conversion and the Superintendent of Police (SP) ruled out angle of conversion in the initial phase of the investigation.

While the bench of Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Bela M Trivedi issued notice, it refused to interfere with the CBI investigation and allowed the probe to continue. The bench told the State that the evidence be handed over to CBI and that it should not treat this as a prestige issue.

The bench also issued notice in the petition filed by the congregation which runs the school where the deceased girl was studying at the time. The bench questioned Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi appearing for the DGP on which aspect was it aggrieved, was it on the observations made by the court or the direction for CBI probe. Mr Rohatgi said it was aggrieved by both aspects.

“With great respect, this was not a case of any other ramifications. The HCs interferes and day to day orders are passed. A dying declaration is on record. This is not an exceptional case. This is not a case that should reflect on the police of the state. Why such a big issue is made about it? Every day HC is passing order,” Rohatgi submitted, as reported by LiveLaw. However, the bench stated that the circumstances during the pendency of the case “weighed with the High Court” while passing the impugned order.

Senior Advocate P Wilson appeared for the state and submitted that the High Court overstepped by ordering CBI probe since the single bench only had jurisdiction to deal with the state police investigation. The prayer in the petition was only for  a CID probe and the CBI probe was pleaded for only orally in court.

Background

The court’s observations in the impugned order ranged from making comments about the name of the village being “Michealpatti” to make it appear that conversion angle is probable, to quoting from popular culture references to show how characters in movies defied attempts at religious conversion, to casting aspersions on the SP that she wanted to divert attention from the conversion angle in the case.

The case has caused a major political row with the involvement of a Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) leader who recorded the statement of the minor girl. On January 28, a petition was submitted to Thanjavur district collector by residents of Michaelpatti village stating that “unidentified persons are coming to their village and trying to create communal disharmony.” According to reports, the villagers told officials that they “are being asked to speak against the school where the class 12 student was studying.” They added that their own children have studied in the school and there is no question of forced conversions.

In the order, the court cast serious aspersions on the state police carrying out the investigation stating, “The attempt of the police appears to be to derail the investigation…. It is too early in the day for the police or the politicians to jump to conclusions. But they have done so. That is why, the petitioner is apprehensive that if the investigation continues to remain in the hands of the State police, he will not get justice. His apprehension is justified.”

While ordering transfer of investigation to CBI, the court said, “The foregoing circumstances cumulatively taken will definitely create an impression that the investigation is not proceeding on the right lines. Since a high ranking Hon’ble Minister himself has taken a stand, investigation cannot continue with the State Police.”

Related:

Thanjavur minor’s suicide: Madras HC orders case transfer to CBI; rife with prejudices, hints at ‘religious conversion’ angle
Thanjavur: Villagers submit petition to DC about elements trying to create communal disharmony
MP High Court warns state against “moral policing” in interfaith marriage where wife converted willingly

The post Thanjavur minor suicide: SC allows CBI probe to continue, issues notice appeared first on SabrangIndia.

In what has been dubbed the “biggest bank fraud”, Gujarat-based ship building company ABG Shipyard allegedly cheated a consortium of 28 banks to the tune of ₹ 22,842 crore, as per a statement released by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). The matter has taken a serious political turn as the Congress Party alleged the role of the Bharatiya Janata Party ( BJP) led government in the case.

On February 12, 2022, the CBI registered a case against the private company and its directors Rishi Kamlesh Agarwal and others following a complaint from the State Bank of India (SBI). According to the complaint, ABG cheated the consortium led by ICICI bank and including branches of erstwhile State Bank of Patiala, Commercial Finance Branch, New Delhi, erstwhile State Bank of Travancore, Commercial Branch, New Delhi, State Bank of India, Overseas Branch, Mumbai, among others.

The company, engaged in shipbuilding and ship repair, allegedly committed fraud by way of diverting large amount of funds to its related parties for purposes other than originally intended for the funds, as per the bank. Subsequently adjustment entries were made, said the CBI statement. SBI alleged that the bank loans were diverted for huge investment in the overseas subsidiary to purchase huge assets in the name of its related parties.

“Searches were conducted on Saturday at 13 locations in the premises of accused including private  company, Directors at Surat, Bharuch, Mumbai, Pune etc which led to recovery of incriminating documents,” said the CBI.

Reacting to this news, Congress General Secretary Randeep Surjewala called a press conference on February 13 to demand an explanation for the delay in lodging an FIR against the company even though the liquidation proceeding against ABG shipyard was initiated in 2017. He stressed that the Congress party held a press conference warning the central government of the company being a potential scam on February 15, 2018, and asked, “Why did the Modi-government refuse to take note of the public allegations made in writing by congress?”

After the ABG loan/bank account being declared a “fraud” on June 19, 2019, the SBI wrote to the CBI on November 8 of the same year requesting action against the ABG and Agrawal. Sujrewala alleged that from then the CBI and SBI continued to “push the file back and forth” while the “fraudster” got the leisure time to loot the bank.

In response, the SBI issued a statement on Sunday stating that the bank was in continuous engagement and exchanging information with the CBI and other banks. It said that a fraud is declared on the basis of the Forensic Audit report findings that are discussed in joint lender meetings. When such a declaration is made, an initial report is sent to the SBI and more information is sent based on their enquiries.

“In a few cases, when substantial additional information is gathered, a second complaint incorporating full and complete details is filed which forms basis for the FIR,” said the SBI emphasising that there was no effort to delay the process.

Still, Sujrewala argued that the five year delay in action indicates the “gross mismanagement of the banking system, holding the banking system captive to fraudsters and the initiation of the loot-and-escape flagship scheme for bank fraudsters.” He further said that in the last seven and half years, bank frauds worth ₹ 5,35,000 cr took place between 2014 and 2021, write-offs by banks in India amount to ₹ 8,17,000 cr in the same period, and bank Non Performing Asset (NPA) stood at ₹ 21,00,000 cr.

Alleging connection between the BJP and the ABG Shipyard, Sujrewala said that Chief Minister Narendra Modi in 2007 gave 1,21,000 sqm of industrial estate in Surat to the company. A Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) report regarding the matter also said that the ABG was allocated land at ₹ 700 per sqm when the land price was 100 percent higher. Despite this, Modi gave 50 hectares of government-acquired land of the Dahej port to the shipping company under a Special Economic Zone (SEZ).

Meanwhile, the BJP retaliated to the Opposition’s allegations stating that these loans were sanctioned when the UPA was in power whereas the Modi government has gone after promoters behind such frauds. Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman said that the account had turned into a non-performing asset (NPA) in November 2013 while the UPA was in power.

“[To] the noises that are coming that ‘Oh, this is the biggest scam in Prime Minister Modi’s time! Not at all! This was a loan given well prior to 2013, it had even become an NPA by 2013,” said Sitharaman addressing the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) board on February 14.

Related:

Air India sale: The making of One Lakh Crore scam?
CEL sale, a threat to national security: Employees
Gadbadjhala: Mystery that is PM CARES
Kuch ka saath aur Cronies ka Vikas

The post SBI levels bank fraud of ₹ 22,842 crore against ABG shipyard appeared first on SabrangIndia.

On Sunday, the President of India promulgated two Ordinances by the Ministry of Law and Justice effectively allowing for terms of the chiefs of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and Enforcement Directorate (ED) for up to five years, as opposed to the previous fixed term of two years. The extension will be granted each year as opposed to fixing the tenure at five years.

The move is being seen by many as a means for the regime to exercise greater control over the two premier investigation agencies in the country. As long as the chiefs dance to the regime’s tunes, they can keep their jobs.

The Ordinances essentially amend two key Acts that govern the functioning of these agencies:

–        Delhi Police Special Establishment Act that governs the functioning of the CBI, and

–        the Central Vigilance Act that concerns the appointment of the director of the ED.

The Ordinances may be read here: 

Both the CBI and the ED have been allegedly used by the regime to target dissenters and human rights activists, who are often allegedly dragged into criminal cases on trumped up charges. The CBI has already faced allegations of being a “caged parrot”, now even the ED has been disempowered as part of is being seen as the regime’s wider proto-fascist agenda.

The move, understandably therefore, drew sharp criticism from civil society members. Calling it “shocking and malafide, activist and advocate Prashant Bhushan said that this was “an attempt to further subvert the independence of CBI and ED.”

Sitaram Yechuri, meanwhile drew attention to the timing of the Ordinances and pointed out how these are just surreptitious methods to subvert the Parliament. He tweeted, “Parliament session begins on 29th. To avoid its scrutiny, Centre on Sunday promulgates ordinances to extend the tenure of Directors of CBI and ED. This desperate hurry smacks of something fishy.”

Many others including Derek O’Brian from the Trinamool Congress, Sanjay Jha of the Congress, also condemned the move.

Two brazen Ordinances extend ED and CBI Director terms from 2?? to 5 years ?????#Parliament Winter Session begins two weeks from now. Be rest assured, Opposition parties will do all it takes to stop India from turning into an elected autocracy

— Derek O’Brien | ডেরেক ও’ব্রায়েন (@derekobrienmp) November 15, 2021

So now ED and CBI head to have 5 year terms being hurriedly pushed through an Ordinance. This proves two things:
1) BJP is corrupting institutional integrity and independence
2) It is worried it might or will lose 2024.

Even a start-up has a better job rotation policy.

— Sanjay Jha (@JhaSanjay) November 15, 2021

ED Director Sanjay Kumar Mishra, a 1984-batch Indian Revenue Service officer of the Income Tax cadre, was appointed ED director on November 19, 2018. His term was to come to an end in 2020. But he was granted an extension amidst much controversy last year.

Interestingly, on September 8, this year the Supreme Court had dismissed a plea challenging Mishra’s term extension. But the SC bench comprising Justice L Nageswara Rao and Justice BR Gavai had also held, “We make it clear that no further extension shall be granted to the second respondent.” The second respondent in the case was SK Mishra. The complete order may be read here:

Meanwhile, the CBI has been scandal-ridden since the very public feud between Alok Kumar Verma and Rakesh Asthana in 2018 (dubbed CBI vs CBI), when they held two of the senior-most posts in the investigative agency. Asthana has now been appointed Commissioner of Delhi Police. Interestingly, Asthana is also a 1984-batch IPS officer, and was due to retire on July 31, 2021. However, his service tenure has now been extended for one more year, or till further orders.

Related:

Assam: CBI arrests Opposition leader’s brother
Give autonomy to CBI: Madras HC to GoI
Unshackle the CBI from political control: Teesta Setalvad
With Asthana as Interim CBI Chief, CBI Resembles the Gujarat Bureau of Investigation
CBI U-Turn against its own chargesheet in the Sohrabuddin case, the caged parrot syndrome?

The post Term extension of ED, CBI chiefs: Centre playing puppet-master? appeared first on SabrangIndia.

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has arrested three leaders of the Trinamool Congress (TMC) and a former mayor in connection with a Narada sting operation. The case refers to a sting operation where all four were caught accepting bribes on camera. The move comes a week after West Bengal Governor Jagdeep Dhankar sanctioned prosecution against them.

The CBI arrested TMC ministers Firhad Hakim and Subrata Mukherji, TMC MLA Madan Mitra and ex-Kolkata mayor Sovan Chatterjee who was previously a member of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). Following the arrest TMC supporters gathered outside the CBI office in Kolkata and held demonstrations. Mamata Banerjee too reached the Nizam Palace venue and refused to budge saying that the arrests were illegal.

Meanwhile, Banerjee’s nephew and TMC MP Abhishek urged party workers and supporters to refrain from violence. He tweeted, “I urge everyone to abide by the law & refrain from any activity that violates lockdown norms for the sake of the larger interest of Bengal and its people. We have utmost faith in the judiciary & the battle will be fought legally.”

I urge everyone to abide by the law & refrain from any activity that violates lockdown norms for the sake of the larger interest of Bengal and its people.

We have utmost faith in the judiciary & the battle will be fought legally.

— Abhishek Banerjee (@abhishekaitc) May 17, 2021

The governor too tweeted asking for law and order to be maintained:

Concerned at alarming situation. Call upon @MamataOfficial to follow constitutional norms & rule of law.

Police @WBPolice @KolkataPolice @HomeBengal must take all steps to maintain law & order.

Sad- situation is being allowed to drift with no tangible action by authorities.

— Governor West Bengal Jagdeep Dhankhar (@jdhankhar1) May 17, 2021

Meanwhile, The Telegraph quoted a CBI statement that said, “Firhad Hakim, Subrata Mukherjee, Madan Mitra and Sovan Chatterjee have been arrested today by CBI anti-corruption bureau and are being produced in the jurisdictional court. On completion of investigation, prosecution sanction was sought against the public servants… Further investigation of the case shall continue.”

Senior lawyer and Congress spokesperson, Abhishek Manu Singhvi raised an interesting point when he tweeted about the possible illegality of the arrests saying, “West Bengal arrestees cannot be proceeded against without Speaker’s sanction. Hence lack of jurisdiction plus vindictive arrest plus timing of arrests, all smack of, steeped in and clearly proves cheapest and most vile vendetta.”

3/3As MLA’s, #WB arrestees cannot be proceeded against wo #Speaker’s sanction. Hence lack of jurisdiction plus vindictive arrests plus timing of arrests, all smack of, steeped in & clearly proves cheapest &most vile vendetta!

— Abhishek Singhvi (@DrAMSinghvi) May 17, 2021

About the Narada sting

The sting operation was carried out by Narada News portal CEO Mathew Samuel in 2014, but the tapes that show as many as 12 leaders taking bribes were made public only in 2016 around the time of elections. Interestingly, among the 12 were Mukul Roy and Suvendu Adhikari who have since jumped ship to the BJP. Interestingly, the BJP quietly removed a video of the sting operation from its Youtube site.

The Calcutta High Court had ordered a probe into the case in 2017, and the Supreme Court rejected a plea by the West Bengal government for a stay on the order for a probe.

Related:

BJP removes Narada sting operation from YouTube channel, faces storm of criticism

The post CBI arrests TMC leaders in Narada sting case appeared first on SabrangIndia.

After a nationwide uproar, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) took over investigations in the alleged gang rape and murder of a 19-year-old Dalit woman in Hathras, Uttar Pradesh. The First Information Report (FIR) was originally registered at the Chandpa Police Station, Hathras, Uttar Pradesh. The CBI registered a FIR on October 11, 2020 under sections of murder and gangrape of the Indian Penal Code and relevant sections of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. But this FIR mysteriously went missing from the CBI’s official website only hours later!

The Uttar Pradesh government has been recommending a CBI probe to the Supreme Court since October 6 amid a growing political storm and saying that it will ensure that no vested interests are able to create a false narrative with “oblique motives”, reported by The Mint. The Central Government issued a notification on Sunday directing the CBI to take over the investigation. The notification issued by the Centre had asked the CBI to probe rape, murder and atrocity and “any attempt, abetment and/or conspiracy, in relation to or in connection with such offence(s) and/or for any other offence committed in the course of the same transaction or arising out of the same facts”.

A CBI source informed The Print that, “The Hathras case will now be probed by the Ghaziabad branch of CBI’s Lucknow Zone” and “The team will visit the crime scene along with forensic experts. The team will recreate the crime and also look for fresh evidence. The team will also analyse the tower locations of the accused, their call detail records”.

Just hours after registering an FIR on Sunday under section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, for offences related to rape, attempt to murder, gang rape, murder of the Indian Penal Code and section 3 of the SC/ST Prevention of Atrocities Act (punishments for offences of atrocities), the CBI removed it from their website. Both the FIR and a press release were published on the agency’s website, but the FIR was later removed.

Late in the afternoon, a fresh release was posted, stating that the agency had registered a case “against an accused and taken over the investigation of the case, earlier registered vide CC no-136/2020 at Police Station Chandpa, District-Hathras (Uttar Pradesh) on a complaint. The complainant had alleged that on 14.09.2020, the accused tried to strangulate his sister in the millet field. The case has been registered by CBI on the request of Uttar Pradesh Government and further Notification from Government of India,” the CBI said in a notification, reported by The Hindustan Times.

The 19-year-old who was allegedly gang raped and murdered by 4 upper caste men succumbed to her injuries on September 29, 2020 at a Delhi Hospital. The local administration’s move to cremate the victim’s body late at night without the family’ consent triggered a massive outcry and condemnation from across the country.   

The FIR may be read here:   

Related:

UP Police breached the law in Hathras
UP Police now claim that Hathras Dalit victim was not raped!
No dignity even in death for Dalits
Hathras horror: UP Police file 19 cases across the state, charges include sedition

The post Hathras FIR goes missing from CBI website! appeared first on SabrangIndia.

Picture courtesy BCCL

Expressing “shock and outrage” LC says they are being victimised by the State for taking on sensitive cases where the key accused are people who occupy high offices in the present government. The statement says, “In the immediate past, the office bearers of the LC have represented the  persons  detained in the Bhima Koregaon case, the Police Commissioner of West Bengal, Rajiv Kumar and while not commenting on the merits of the case, have been vocal on the subversion of due process of law in the Courts in the matter of the alleged sexual harassment by a former  employees of the Supreme Court of India.” Indira Jaising, a founding member of LC was has also been at the forefront of several key human rights cases. Recently, Jaising was very vocal about the manner in which the SC dealt with allegations of sexual harassment against Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi. It is also noteworthy that LC founding member Anand Grover was a part of a team of lawyers that petitioned the SC on behalf of 1993 blast convict Yakub Memon to postpone his execution, just hours before he was hanged. 

The statement says, “The LC has reason to believe that its officer bearers are personally being targeted for speaking up in defence of human rights, secularism and independence of the judiciary in all fora more particularly in their capacity as senior lawyers in court. The LC sees this as a blatant attack of the right to representation of all persons, particularly the marginalised and those who dissent in their views form the ruling party. It is also an attack in the right to free speech and expression and an attack on the legal profession as such.”

It is alleged that the CBI acted against LC, its functionaries as well as certain private individuals after receiving a complaint from Anil Kumar Dhasmana who is the Under Secretary in the Union Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA). This complaint states that after inspection of the books of accounts and the records of the NGO, a prima facie violation of the FCRA 2010 was noticed. The complaint was made on May 15 shortly after a petition was filed in the SC by a group called Lawyers Voice making similar allegations.

On June 13, the CBI had filed an FIR against LC, Anand Grover and others for suspected offences of criminal conspiracy, criminal breach of trust, cheating, making of false statement in the declaration under the FCRA 2010, and criminal misconduct under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. In addition to invoking the provisions of the Indian Penal Code, the CBI has charged them under Sections 33, 35, 37, and 39 of the FCRA 2010 and Section 13(2) with Section 13(1)(d) of the PC Act.

Pointing out the antecedents of Lawyers Voice, the statement said, “The Lawyers Voice comprises lawyers from the BJP and its main protagonist is Mr. Neeraj is the head of the Legal Cell of the BJP in Delhi. The organization clams it has no income and no PAN card, a mandatory requirement for filing a PIL. When the Petition was filed the LC pointed out in a press statement that the petition did not have the basic averments of a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution, and therefore was not maintainable. We have expressed our surprise that notice on the Petition was issued at all in the said Petition.”

This FCRA matter originally dates back to 2016, when the MHA had cancelled the FCRA license of the organisation. LC had challenged this in the Bombay High Court and the appeal is still pending before the court. According to LC’s statement, at the time of filing the appeal, LC had pointed out “that the FCRA proceedings were taken against it because its office bearers had taken up sensitive cases against the leading figures of the BJP and the Government of India, including Mr. Amit Shah, the present Home Minister, in the Sorabbudin case, amongst others.”

The MHA had also raised objections to Jaising continuing to receive remuneration from LC when she was serving as Additional Solicitor General of India. But LC had clarified, “Ms. Jaising’s remuneration was permissible under the FCRA, it was being paid by the LC was before she became the ASG and continued during and after her tenure in that capacity. Moreover she taken the permission of the Law Minister to continue to receive the remuneration under the Law Officers (Terms and Conditions) Rules, which has been admitted by the MHA. The allegation of the MHA was premised on the assumption that as the ASG Ms. Jaising was a government servant, which she was not.”

The complete statement by LC may be read here:

The post Lawyers Collective rebuts CBI’s allegations appeared first on SabrangIndia.