The centre has decided that any government officials facing investigation or prosecution for corruption charges will not be given clearance needed for a passport. According to reports, any government official who has an FIR registered against him/her by a government entity after preliminary inquiry will also not be given clearance for a passport.
According to the revised guidelines of the ministry of personnel, such government officials will not be given the vigilance clearance needed for grant of a passport. However, according to reports, the concerned authorities can take a call if the circumstances are extremely urgent (like medical emergencies) for the officer to travel abroad.
The vigilance clearance will also be withheld if the concerned officer is under suspension or been involved in a trap/raid case under charges of corruption and investigations are pending, if the concerned officer has been named in a charge sheet filed by a government agency in any criminal case. It will also apply if a sanction of investigation/prosecution against the person has been granted by the relevant authority under Prevention of Corruption Act.
According to reports, the norms for denial of vigilance clearance for officials existed before for pending criminal proceedings. It has now been extended to include corruption/graft cases too under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
In cases where the FIR against the official has been filed on a private complaint, a charge sheet must have been filed by a government entity and there should be no directions to the contrary by a court of law for denial of vigilance clearance. However, the new guidelines also mention that information regarding FIR based on private complaints may be provided to the passport authorities and the issuing authorities may take the final decision on the issue of passport accordingly.
Union Minister and BJP MP Babul Supriyo was denied entry into parts of his own Asansol constituency in West Bengal, which have been marred by communal violence since the attack on a Ram Navami procession on Monday.
The situation has remained tense since then, with reports claiming that two people died in the violence on Thursday. This took the total deaths in the state owing to Ram Navami clashes to five. The state administration amongst it actions, imposed section 144 in Asansol and also suspended the internet services in the area.
As per reports, Supriyo, while trying to enter Railpar region, faced opposition from a group of people who demanded that he leave the area immediately. Supriyo had initially visited some of his constituents, a section of which then egged him to visit the areas affected by the violence. Supriyo decided to continue his march into the affected areas, which resulted in him being stopped by the police.
The police also proceeded to file two FIRs against him containing non-bailable offences after there was an alleged scuffle with the cops. Supriyo later decided to file a counter FIR against IPS officer Rupesh Kumar, alleging assault.
With regards to him barred from entering the affected areas Supriyo commented that, as a public representative he had every right to visit his constituency especially when the people there were in trouble. He claimed that the police barred his entry by quoting the imposition of section 144.
Since the incident he has also taken to twitter to allege that TMC councillors were being allowed to freely move in an area while he was surrounded by the Rapid Action Force as soon as he got down from his car. He also alleged that he was abused by TMC workers, who also threatened the victims of the communal violence:
Earlier during the initial days of the communal violence, which included senior police officers being attacked with bombed, Supriyo had put the blame on the ‘minority community’ for the said violence and also alleged that they were being given a safe haven to escape following their attack.
Minister of State General VK Singh will be visiting Iraq on April 1 to bring back the mortal remains of the 39 Indians who were killed in Mosul by the ISIS. General VK Singh will land in India on 2nd April with the mortal remains which will then be handed over to the families. It is reported that the plane carrying the mortal remains will first go to Amritsar, then to Patna and then to Kolkata.
A total of 40 Indians had gone missing in Mosul where one survivor Harjit Masih had claimed to have escaped from the ISIS and the rest had died. However, in absence of evidence, the remaining 39 were not declared dead by Indian government. In her address to the Rajya Sabha earlier this month, External Affairs Ministers Sushma Swaraj had said that the person Harjit Masih had escaped from ISIS under the false identity of Bangladeshi national named Ali with the help of a caterer.
Soon after the announcement in Rajya Sabha, General VK Singh had stated that it would take around 8-10 days to bring back the mortal remains of the nationals as the legal procedures were underway.
Earlier, General VK Singh had led the rescue operations in Yemen where not only about 5,500 Indians but 1,000 foreigners from Asian countries near India were also reportedly rescued by the Indian Navy on humanitarian grounds.
Evidence has now emerged in the media on possible Congress link to the infamous data analytics firm Cambridge Analytica. Several media persons are using several tricks in the box to defend Congress to the hilt.
At the moment there is no conclusive evidence of Congress’ involvement with Cambridge Analytica in the form of contract papers or official transactions. However, at the same time, there is no dire requirement to shield Congress from two pieces of evidence that seem to be pointing fingers at them. They are:
Picture of a poster with Congress symbol hanging in Cambridge Analytica office.
The most innocent looking defence is that of diversion. Feeling emotional that some other issue is being ignored at the cost of Cambridge Analytica of Facebook. However, Ms Ghosh’s tweet came before the evidence linking Congress and Cambridge Analytica came to the attention of the world.
Pallavi Ghosh Tweet
Soon after the reports of Chris Wylie’s statement came out, Rajdeep Sardesai was anguished about an accusation of ‘supari channels’ accusing Congress stole data. Why would an accusation by some channel cause distress to Rajdeep? After all, many can accuse Rajdeep of being ‘Supari journalist’ after seeing this video where he targets Modi.
Rajdeep Sardesai’s Tweet
A journalist found a method to rationalise the whole matter and distributed the blame between both BJP and Congress though there was no evidence of a direct link of Cambridge Analytica with BJP at the moment when he posted his Tweet.
Suman Raman’s tweet on Cambridge Analytica
Another journalist who has been vocal on the Cambridge Analytica issue is Shivam Vij. According to him, failure of Congress in elections is in itself a strong evidence that the Congress did not engage the tainted firm. This is indeed an insightful statement but does not count as a conclusive evidence to absolve Congress.
Shivam Vij tweet
Another publication named ‘The Wire’ also came in to defend Congress strongly in one of their articles.
The Wire’s attempt to dismiss existing evidence on Congress Cambridge Analytica link
The article says (emphasis added) :
This is the harder part. On Twitter, pictures of the Congress party’s logo being present in Nix’s offices in London are currently being circulated. Wylie, on Tuesday, stated that he believed “Congress was a client” of CA.
But both of these developments aren’t hard evidence. There is also no proof at this point in time that Cambridge Analytica or SCL signed a contract with any Indian political party.
Commenting on the absence of conclusive evidence is acceptable. However, dismissing evidence that has come to light should raise eyebrows. What does ‘The Wire’ stand to gain by taking a stringent stance, while dealing with an accusation against Congress?
All these examples seem to indicate that sections of media are keenly interested in ensuring that the Congress’ alleged involvement with Cambridge Analytica is not considered seriously by the public. The government should launch an investigation in order to ascertain all facts and take the matter to its logical conclusion.
The government of India on Wednesday offered 76% stake of the national carrier Air India to potential bidders in strategic disinvestment amidst opposition from within as well as opposition parties. Congress leader and advisor to UPA chairman Sonia Gandhi, Ahmed Patel expressed his ‘shock’ at the disinvestment proposal.
Shocked to hear the terms of the Air India privatisation. Govt will sell 76% equity but will retain 52% of the company’s debt? Isn’t this a complete sell out designed to benefit certain private agents?
However, soon enough, Patel got slammed by Twitterati who showed him the mirror that it was actually under UPA that Air India mounted the huge debt. Former Executive Director of Air India, Jitender Bhargava, who has also authored the book ‘The Descent of Air India’, chronicling the financial downfall of the public sector airline, blamed Congress for putting the airline in ‘pathetic financial situation’ through flawed decisions of the UPA.
Please check with economist Manmohan Singh if any one would buy Air India with the entire debt passed on? At least have some guilt of having put Air India in the pathetic financial situation through flawed decisions under UPA. @suhelsethhttps://t.co/zw6VXBZmRL
He even said that Patel is being critical of the disinvestment decision without understanding the magnitude of the problem, which was created by his government itself.
Criticism for the sake of criticism, without understanding the magnitude of the problem – all created by his government. https://t.co/IaPLYWlaL5
Journalists, too, questioned Patel whose government took a company which made a small profit to a company that makes crore of loss, annually.
And why did you bring an airline given to you with just Rs 5000 crore debt and small profit to Rs 50,000 crore debt and Rs 5000 crore annual losses? https://t.co/cSWvJfmzXn
While answering questions raised by journalists and the BJP that were based on OpIndia story about Kapil Sibal and his wife acquiring a company named Grande Castello, senior Congress leader and lawyer Kapil Sibal threatened to sue OpIndia for defamation. This, when OpIndia story has only asked a few questions to Sibal about the acquisition and valuation of the company. And this, when the Congress party claims to support journalists’ right to ask questions to powerful people.
In our story, we had questioned whether Kapil Sibal and his wife Promila Sibal bought a company named Grande Castello limited pretty cheap – possibly at the value of the paid-up capital of the company i.e. 1 lakh rupees – because the company had huge liabilities and the major asset it had – a piece of land in New Delhi municipal area – was devalued prior to Sibals acquiring the company.
It should be noted that companies being bought just at the paid-up capital value or less is not indicative of any scam. A loss-making airline Spicejet was sold at just 2 rupees by Maran brothers in 2015 to businessman Ajay Singh because it had huge debts and liabilities.
Grande Castello similarly had major liabilities and loans and thus the company being bought at paid-up capital or even less can be legally justified. We tried to reach out to Kapil Sibal to get clarification about it, but we did not get any response, and we published the story with the facts available in public domain as well as the questions we had sent to Mr Sibal.
It is indeed intriguing what is so defamatory in the whole process that Mr Sibal wants to sue OpIndia.
We still don’t know what price the company was acquired at by Mr Sibal. He maintained that it was legal acquisition but did not specify the amount paid during his interactions with journalists earlier today.
Now, there are two theories.
One is that the company was bought at nominal 1 lakh rupees, which was the paid-up capital of the company which had a negative net value at the time of acquisition. If this is true, then it would mean that Mr Sibal managed to get prime land, which was devalued by changing accounting system — and thus creating a negative net value for the holding company — right before Sibal took over.
The second theory came to light when at noon today I was mysteriously contacted by Mr Piyoosh Goyal. He claimed that the deal went through for Rs 50 crores. If true, it would again be intriguing as to why Kapil Sibal paid such a high amount for a company that has liabilities running in the same range with no apparent business except owning a piece of land in New Delhi areas valued less than the liabilities.
To that assertion, I, as Editor of OpIndia.com, said that I would be emailing a detailed questionnaire to Goyal, and if he can provide documentary evidence, his unedited response would be published.
The questions we asked were as follows :
click on the image for a larger view
As can be seen, the questions were sent to Mr Piyoosh Goyal at 12:58 PM. Till the time this story broke on mainstream media, we had not got a response from Mr Goyal. At about 8:00 PM, a good 8 hours later, I again got a call from Mr Goyal saying that he had already made his statement to Republic TV and hence didn’t wish to respond to our email.
And thus, we got no documentary evidence to support the Rs 50 crores claim.
Now, let’s assume Piyoosh Goyal’s claims of the deal going through at Rs 50 crores was authentic. The question then arises why would Sibal pay Rs. 50 crores to buy a company whose net worth was in the negative owing to a devalued land and 51 crores liability.
We have forwarded questions to confirm both theories. One to Mr Sibal and one to Mr Goyal. Sadly, we have got no response from either.
In fact, we asked questions about the acquisition of the company. Mr Sibal in his presser has mixed up and referred to the company being bought once, and switched to talking about buying the land in the next moment.
The reason we wanted to know about the amount paid as well as about him owning the company is because he had – rather strangely – denied that he owned the company in January this year, even though the documents suggested that he had bought the company in the financial year 2016-2017.
The following email exchanges between an investigative journalist from South Africa and Kapil Sibal (being reproduced here with due permission from the South African journalist) show that Kapi Sibal had denied owning the company in January 2018. During his press interaction today, he confirmed that he owned the company:
click on the image for a larger view
Full details of Sibal’s exchanges with the South African journalists can be read here.
Our questions were based on this suspicious and intriguing behaviour by Kapil Sibal while responding to questions by the South African investigative journalists.
We made no allegations and rather asked questions. What was extremely intriguing is the way land was de-valued a year before Kapil Sibal bought Grande Castello, making the net worth of the company virtually negative. This is why we argued that Kapil Sibal could have paid any non-zero number to acquire the company (and we grant that it would still have been a legal transaction).
Our story was based on the research of a remarkable group of South African journalists and we stand by our story.
If Mr Sibal thinks we should be sued for asking him questions, there isn’t much we can say to that, can we?
Senior Congress leader and lawyer Kapil Sibal earlier today told media persons that he indeed had bought a company and his transaction was legal. He was responding to questions put by journalists following OpIndia.com exclusive report over Kapil Sibal buying a company named Grande Castello.
However, today’s statement by Kapil Sibal can be seen as a complete u-turn within a matter of two months, because in January this year he had given evasive and misleading answers about owning or being a director in Grande Castello to a South African investigative journalist named Craig McKune.
Craig works with a South Africa based non-profit organisation named amaBhungane that undertakes investigative journalism. He had reached out to Sibal during his investigations about Gupta brothers – India born businessmen accused of being corruption partners of the then South African President Jacob Zuma.
Craig discovered that in 2017, Kapil Sibal had become a director in Grande Castello, which was originally a subsidiary of Worlds Window, a company controlled by Piyoosh Goyal – a man who was suspected of laundering money with the Gupta brothers.
Let’s have a look at the questions Craig sent and the response of Kapil Sibal in January 2018 – by when he had already acquired the company (which he admitted today) and was appointed a director:
(The email interaction is being reproduced here with permission from Craig McKune. Since the email address of both Craig and Sibal are in public domain, we are not blanking that out, but blanking out some other potentially private information. We are also highlighting a part that we think deserves attention)
click on the image for a larger view
So as one can see, on January 11, 2018 – when pointed out that he became a director in Grande Castello, Sibal says “you don’t seem to have your facts right”.
Now today Sibal admits that he owns Grande Castello, so what was the reason to give such a misleading response to Craig just two months back? Why was he not forthright in admitting that he owned Grande Castello?
Perhaps being a shrewd lawyer, Sibal was referring to Grande Castello no longer being a Worlds Window subsidiary (since he and his wife bought 100% of the shares, it was no longer a subsidiary of Worlds Window), which allowed him to claim that “you don’t seem to have your facts right”.
However, Craig sent another set of questions to Kapil Sibal on the same day, and let’s see what Sibal said:
click on the image for a larger view
So yet again, despite being given specific proof about Kapil Sibal being a director in Grande Castello, Sibal tells Craig that “I have never been a Director of any subsidiary company of any company”.
Yet again, perhaps it was a verbal jugglery by Sibal because technically Grande Castello ceased to be a subsidiary company once it was acquired by Kapil Sibal and his wife, but the issue here is why could the Congress leader simply not say the same to Craig then, which he has now admitted in public?
In fact, Craig sent yet another email on the same day i.e. on January 11, 2018, this time with documentary proof that Grande Castello was a Worlds Window subsidiary and that Kapil Sibal was a director in Grande Castello, and requested Sibal to clarify what he meant by facts being wrong. That mail was not responded to.
Craig finally sent a follow-up email the following day, which was responded a couple of days later by Kapil Sibal, and that was the final communication. Here is that email exchange:
click on the image for a larger view
So yet again, Kapil Sibal refused to tell the South African journalist that he indeed owned Grande Castello and that he was a director in the company. Following which, amaBhungane published the story, and strangely no one in the Indian mainstream media picked it up.
This, when it’s clear that he was evasive in his reply to South African journalists and for some reason didn’t tell them that he indeed had bought Grande Castello – something he disclosed today.
What was the reason for being evasive? Only Sibal can tell, but he clearly doesn’t like answering questions.
Stefaans Brümmer of amaBhungane told OpIndia.com that he was glad that finally someone in India was following up the story, and along with his colleague Craig McKune, gave us the permission to carry these emails that show how Kapil Sibal was not forthright in his responses, and why OpIndia decided to raise the issue in India.
We thank Stefaans and Craig for this cooperation, and we are also reproducing their email the exchange with Kapil Sibal’s son Akhil Sibal below as requested by them because they thought that it’s only fair that full information goes into the public and Kapil Sibal’s son is not unnecessarily dragged into the whole controversy.
In deference to their request, which we believe is totally fair and ethical, we are reproducing the email exchange of amaBhungane with Akhil Sibal:
Email exchange with the son of Kapil Sibal (click on the image for larger view)
UPDATE: (30 March, 11 AM) Craig informed us that the last set of questions that he had sent both to Kapil Sibal and Akhil Sibal was in pdf format, and thus not visible in the screenshot. He said Sibal appeared to have replied to a different thread, though with similar questions (barring detailed questions about operations of Grande Castello and the price at which it was bought — something we asked later in our article), saying he did not wish to correspond further. However, the following is the mail and set of questions sent by Craig that were not answered by Sibal. We still don’t why why he evaded them:
Final set of questions to Kapil Sibal and Akhil Sibal that remained unanswered (click on the image for larger view)
After the official app of the Congress party vanished from the Play Store amidst allegations of data theft, Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah’s app has been deleted after a person on Twitter alleged that the app was selling personal data to a private company.
Siddaramaiah APP, run by Government of Karnataka(unlike NM app) sends my details to a website owned by a private company.
Data is not encrypted, sent as http instead https pic.twitter.com/xj2IGSdh2x
Another individual who claims to be a French security researcher mentioned that the name, phone number, date of birth, gender of the user is sent to a private company.
3/ I decompiled the app and found this code in the registration method. During the registration, the name, phone number, date of birth, gender of the user is send to https://t.co/mYIwWi6Pf1. pic.twitter.com/PX2TdMAXnS
The data leak scandal has snowballed into a huge controversy after Cambridge Analytica (CA) was exposed as stealing Facebook user’s data. The Congress has found itself in a precarious situation after Chris Wylie, former director of research at CA and whistleblower of the whole scandal, named the Congress part as one of the firm’s clients in his disposition before the British parliament.
Union Minister Ravishankar had earlier demanded an apology from the Congress party after Chris Wylie’s comments. After Siddaramaiah’s app vanished from the Play Store, the Congress continues to find itself in a deep trench in the Data Leak scandal.
The Ravi Shankar Prasad led law ministry on Wednesday approved the filing of a review petition against the recent Supreme Court verdict regarding the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act. As per the 20th March verdict, a Supreme Court bench had issued directions to prevent the misuse of this act.
Legal websites reported that a two judge bench was examining whether safeguards could be put in place so that the said act isn’t misused. Thus the bench issued the directions which included, there won’t be any absolute bar on getting anticipatory bail if there is no prima facie case.
It observed that, “in view of acknowledged abuse of law of arrest”, a public servant can only be arrested after the appointing authority’s approval and in case of a non-public servant, approval would be needed from the SSP.
To prevent the false implication of an innocent, the DSP may conduct a preliminary inquiry to find out if indeed a case can be made out under this act, and whether the allegations are frivolous or motivated.
The Supreme Court bench had made these observations while hearing an appeal by petitioner Dr Subhash Kashinath Mahajan, after the Bombay High Court had refused to quash an FIR filed against him under this act.
Following this verdict various BJP MPs and NDA allies like Ram Vilas Paswan and Ramdas Athawale had expressed their opposition against this order. This verdict soon turned into a political issue after the Congress led opposition had protested in the parliament against this verdict and demanded immediate intervention from the government. The Congress also dubbed the BJP as anti-Dalit for remaining silent in light of this Supreme Court order.
Reports have claimed that merely hours prior to the law ministry’s decision to file a review petition, PM Modi had met a delegation of NDA ministers to possibly assure them that the government was committed towards the upliftment of the Dalits.
The Modi government has in recent days also opposed the creation of a “creamy layer” within the SC/ST groups, which would prevent the affluent members of these communities from availing reservation benefits.
The Madras High Court, on Tuesday, granted the custody of 282 former inmates back to the infamous Saint Joseph’s Hospice. The HC’s order comes after the deaths of 12 elderly inmates in different state recognised care homes.
The HC has ordered the Kancheepuram police to immediately send the 282 inmates back to the hospice. After 294 inmates were shifted to various care homes in the state, the founder of the hospice, Father RV Thomas, who runs the place, has petitioned the Madras High Court for the custody of the inmates.
According to reports, a division bench headed by Justice C T Selvam also ordered the Kancheepuram District social welfare officer to appear before the court and explain the causes of the deaths.
The inmates, however, are reportedly in distress upon hearing the court order. According to reports, many have expressed their unwillingness to go back to the hospice. A 61-year-old inmate Muthammal has reportedly stated that she would rather die at her current care home in Vilvarayanallur than be sent back to the hospice. Many of the inmates have recollections of harrowing treatment they received at the hospice ranging from ill-treatment to lack of basic sanitary conditions, even physical abuse.
The officials of the district social welfare department have also reportedly stated that people have been condemning the HC order. They stated that upon visits to the government recognised care homes where the former residents are currently placed, they have received desperate requests from many of them not to send them back to the hospice. They added that they are in the process of collecting evidence for the former residents’ unwillingness to move back so that the authorities would take appropriate action.
Saint Joseph’s hospice became the centre of grave allegations and controversy last month when complaints of abuse towards sick inmates and bone harvesting emerged after a series of media reports. The Hospice was founded by father RV Thomas in 2011.
தொண்டு நிறுவனத்தில் உயிரிழந்தவர்களை புதைப்பதில்லை, அவர்களின் எலும்புகளை எடுத்து பயன்படுத்துகிறார்கள் – கிராம மக்கள் குற்றச்சாட்டு #Salavakkam#NGOpic.twitter.com/PnbjVuhYdF
The registration of the hospice had expired in September 2017. Several criminal complaints against the hospice had surfaced after a dead body being transported along with vegetables inside an ambulance was caught. The dead body belonged to one of the hospice’s inmates. The Kancheepuram police had shifted the 294 inmates to government recognised institutions.
