This relates to the issue Sonia Gandhi becoming the Prime Minister.
Here it is.
Swamy’s letter to Kalam after consulting him
‘The Central Information Commission (CIC) has directed the President’s Secretariat to make Janata Party chief Subramanian Swamy’s letter to former President Dr A P J Abdul Kalam public after consulting him. Swamy had written to Kalam after the 2004 election which UPA had won.
In the letter Swamy had raised doubts on if Congress president Sonia Gandhi’s candidature would be accepted by the courts as it was unclear whether she had renounced her Italian citizenship as stipulated under the Citizenship Act.
Activist Subhash Agrawal had sought a copy of the letter from the President’s office, which had turned down his application earlier this year, saying the disclosure would be a breach of confidentiality and fiduciary relationship and therefore attracts Sec 8(1)(e) of RTI Act.
A Delhi Court has granted the plea of Dr.Subramanian Swamy to have P.Chidambaram as the co accused in 1987 Merrut Case where people were shot to death.
I came to know of this yesterday by watching a programme of Jaya Plus Tv , a Television Channel(Tamil) when Swamy talked about this and lamented the fact that the case is expected to come for hearing in the next week and that people should publicize the issue.
Now I am doing my bit.
Dr.Swamy called me as a ‘an arm chair Grandpa’ in a Tweet sent to me and my reply was ”Yes, my dear,stumbling grand child. Arm chair grand pas have also a place.’)
“We were sorted out on the basis of our strength and physique, while elders and children were picked up and set free. The youth were grouped together and put in a yellow PAC truck. ”..”was pulled out of the truck, shot at twice and thrown into the Ganga stream”.
– Mohamad Usman, prosecution witness and survivor, 2007.
‘Hashimpura massacre took place on 22 May 1987, during the Hindu-Muslim riots in Meerut city in Uttar Pradesh state, India, when 19 personnel of the Provincial Armed Constabulary (PAC) allegedly rounded up 42 Muslim youth from the Hashimpura mohalla (locality) of the city, took them in truck to the outskirts, near Murad Nagar, in Ghaziabad district, where they were shot and their bodies were dumped in water canals. A few days later dead bodies were found floating in the canals. In May 2000, 16 of the 19 accused surrendered, and were later released on bail, while 3 were already dead. The trial of the case was transferred by the Supreme Court of India in 2002 from Ghaziabad to a Sessions Court at the Tis Hazari complex in Delhi,[1][2] where it is the oldest pending case.[3]
On 24 May 2007, twenty years after the incident, two survivors and members of 36 victim families visited Lucknow and filed 615 applications under The Right to Information Act 2005 (RTI), at the office of Director General of Police seeking information about the case.[4] The inquiry revealed in September that all accused remained in service, and none had any mention of the incident in their Annual Confidential Report (ACR)s.[5] Five men who were shot and survived, later became witness for the prosecution case in 2007. These include Muzib-ur-Rehman, Mohamad Usman, Zulfiqar Nasir, and Naeem Arif.[6]…
After communal riots had taken over Meerut in April 1987, in a communally-charged atmosphere after the Babri Mosque at Ayodhya was opened by the Central government for worship by Hindus after several decades; PAC was called in, but was withdrawn as the riots subsided. However violence erupted again around 19 May, when 10 people were killed as arson escalated, thus Army was called out to stage a flag march. Seven companies ofCRPF has reached the city during the day, while 30 companies of PAC were being rushed in and indefinite curfew was declared.[8] In the following day, mobs burned down Gulmarg cinema hall, and as the death toll rose to 22 and 75 injured, shoot-at-sight orders were issued on 20 May 1987. Union Urban Development Minister, Mohsina Kidwai, and member of the Lok Sabha from Meerut constituency, after visiting the city stated, she had never seen “such a horrible face of arson before in my life“.[9]
On the night of 22 May 1987, 19 PAC personnel, under platoon commander Surinder Pal Singh, rounded up Muslims in the Hashimpur mohalla in Meerut, the old and the children were later separated and let go. Then they allegedly took about 40–45 of them, mostly daily wage labourers and weavers, in a truck to the Upper Ganga canal in Murad Nagar, Ghaziabad district, instead of taking them to the police station. Here some of them were shot, one by one, and thrown into the canal. A bullet also injured one of the PAC constables. After some were killed, the headlights of passing vehicles made PAC personnel flee the spot with those alive. Four of those shot escaped, either by pretending dead and then swimming away, one of them filed a first information report (FIR) at the Murad Nagar Police Station.[4][7][10]
The remaining men were next taken in the truck to the Hindon River Canal near Makanpur village in Ghaziabad, shot and their bodies thrown into the canal. Here again, two of the persons who were shot at, survived and lodged an FIR at the Link Road Police Station.[4][7][10][11].
Janata Party chief Subramanian Swamy finally received a brahmastra (according to Puranas, one of the most powerful weapon) against Union Home Minister P Chidambaram. A Delhi court on Monday, Jul 9 empowered Swamy after allowing him to file a plea against Chidambaram over Meerut riots case in Uttar Pradesh. The court allowed the Janata Party chief to make the Home Minister a co-accused in the mass killing case. During verbal argument, Swamy urged the court to allow him to move the application adding some unnamed co-accused under Section 319 Code of Criminal Procedure. According to 319 Code of Criminal Procedure, one gets the power to proceed against other persons appearing to be guilty of an offence.
He is reported to have visited the site one day earlier and a day later to the site.
Hope Justice is done.
The trial of the accused personnel of the Provincial Armed Constabulary (PAC) charged with the cold blooded murder of about forty Muslims of Hashimpura, Meerut on 22 May 1987 has taken more than 19 years to haltingly start in the Tees Hazari Court, Delhi on July 15 2006. It is not only a case of proverbial judicial delay, but crookedness of the course of law that deserves critical scrutiny to be able to understand how the system has given rise to a climate of impunity, especially in heinous hate crimes against vulnerable groups, which emboldens the criminals including those in official uniforms and causes frustration among victims, who lose hope in the system.
According to the order of 18 May 2006 by the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi, N P Kaushik it is the prosecution’s case based on the inquiry report of the Crime Branch of the CID (CBCID), that curfew was clamped in Mohalla Hashimpura of Meerut city in the name of search for illegal arms and 644 persons (all Muslims) were randomly picked up from their homes and were arrested. Of these 644, forty two (mostly younger ones) were directly taken in a PAC truck to Upper Ganga Canal, Murad Nagar, where some were shot at and the bodies were thrown into the canal and the remaining were taken to Hindon river, where similar operation was done. Though all were taken as dead, a few survived. FIR was lodged on the basis of their statements on 22/23 May 1987.A few days later dead bodies were found floating in the canals — sending shock waves worldwide.
The ghastly incident had stirred the conscience of the nation, as the outrage it caused in the average citizen was more than that felt against terrorist violence, as the killers in this case were those who were supposed to be protectors. Nikhil Chakravarty compared the event with “Nazi pogrom against the Jews, to strike terror and nothing but terror in the whole minority community”. Mr Subramaniam Swamy, who went on fast unto death over the incident, characterized it as a clear case of genocide. Mr Chandra Shekhar made the observation that “the Hashimpura (Meerut) tragedy was the most shocking incident in my political life…”
Nirmal Mukarji observed that “the truth is that Hashimpura and Malliana affected the Muslim psyche as nothing else had since independence, for the community began to see itself as under attack by the state itself. The least that should have been done was to have promptly disbanded this particular unit of the PAC and to have cashiered its officers. But no action was taken. The outcome was that, far from being on the side of the angels, the UP police emerged as the devil itself ”.
In a joint statement, eminent persons including I.K Gujral, Rajindar Sachar, Kuldip Nayar, Subhadra Joshi and Badr-Ud-Din Tyabji demanded that “the government must prosecute all those members of the PAC and police who have disgraced their uniforms. Their misdeeds must be treated at par with treason and tried by special courts”.
The letter that was sent by the team of inquiry led by Justice Rajindar Sachar to the Chief Minister, Uttar Pradesh and Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi, along with the report, was not even acknowledged. Even though the Prime Minister was convinced about the veracity of the case by the testimony of one of the survivors, Zulfiqar Nasir, who was produced before him, and wanted to initiate effective action, he was advised not to do any thing, which could undermine the morale of the armed police, which were, in their view, the main prop of the state’s authority.
When the pressure on the government increased, the Chief Minister B.B Singh instituted an inquiry into the incident by CBCID. By the time the inquiry report was submitted after seven long years in February 1994,the incident had become a forgotten massacre, like a bad dream, by not only the political class but also by all segments of the civil society. People’s Union for Democratic Rights (PUDR) had filed a writ petition in the Supreme Court in 1987 for investigation of the case and damages to the victims, which was routinely dealt with and disposed of on 12 September 1990,enhancing the rehabilitation – compensation from Rs 20,000/- fixed by UP Government to Rs 40,000/-, though with the provision that “ if any one has applied for claim for compensation for death or bodily injuries, our direction for payment of rehabilitation compensation does not intend to affect such claim and same would be available to be proceeded in accordance with law”
Dr.Swamy has leveled serious allegations against Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi on illegal donations , land deals, violating Company Laws and owning property worth Rs. 1600 crore.
Subramanian Swamy.
Rahul Gandhi has threatened to sue Dr.Swamy.
Hope he does.
Please read my blog KGB paid money to Rahul Gandhi.
Read my other blogs on Sonia Gandhi ,Rajiv Gandhi deals filed under Corruption.
Mrs. Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi had floated a Section 25 private company called Young Indian, and acquired the public limited company, the Associated Journals Ltd., which is the owner of National Herald and Quami Awaz Newspapers, and all high value real estate property in Delhi and other places in Uttar Pradesh of the said company. The deal is a sham, bogus, and a violation of several laws. It is a fraud committed in order to grab the Herald Housein Delhi, that is located in a hub and which is valued at about Rs.1600 crores.
The first dubious fact of the AJ Company RoC details is that Jawahar Lal Nehru, Indira, Feroze Gandhi, GD Birlaand other like noted deceased person, are shown as current shareholders! In fact 80 per cent of the original shareholders are no more alive So too many of the defunct firms, including several companies having dubious addresses in Kolkata, are shown as shareholders of the Associated Journals Ltd.
The second dubious fact is the acquisition of the associated Journals Ltld. Judging by documents filed with RoC it is wholly illegal. On February 26, 2011, the Board of AJ Pvt. Ltd. passed a Resolution approving that All India Congress Committee9AICC) had loans to the Company unsecured and for zero interest rate to extinguish the liability of the company of more than Rs.90 crores. It is illegal for a political party to give loans to any company. The Resolution also resolved that in lieu of this deal with AICC, the Board decided to allot all AJ’s nine crore shares, of Rs.10 each to Young Indian, the private company of Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi, where both together more than three fourths of the total shares and fully control the said Young Indian Company.
The third dubious fact is that Young Indian filed statements with the RoC disclosing that the shareholders meeting was held in Sonia Gandhi’s Government allotted 10, Janpath. This is violation of the law since the 10, Janpath, New Delhi Government accommodation cannot be used for commercial purposes and business.
The fourth dubious fact is that the Rs.90 crore liability of The associated Journals was owned by Young Indian for a mere Rs.50 lakhs!
Thus the deal was to grab the Rs.1600 crore worth Herald House and other properties of the National Herald/Quami Awaz in Delhi and in different part of UP for a commitment to pay Rs.50 lakh to AICC for the Rs.90 crores advanced as unsecured zero interest loan.
Therefore, I urge immediate institution of a SFIO/CBI probe into this dubious stinking deal between Young Indian and The Associated Journals as also the illegality of the AICC in giving a loan to a private company in reckless cronyism since the AICC President is Ms. Sonia Gandhi and General Secretary Rahul Gandhi who are also owners of Young Indian, the beneficiary. More curiously, the associated Journals Ltd.’s Chairman Shri Motilal Vore is also the Treasurer of the AICC!
In his election affidavit on assets and liabilities, Mr. Rahul Gandhi had failed to inform that he owned 38 per cent share of a company he had formed named Young Indian with his mother, Ms.Sonia Gandhi, who also owned 38 per cent of the shares.
Ack: OneIndia News.
Janata Party chief Subramanian Swamy today targeted Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi raising questions over acquisition of a company that published the now-defunct National Herald newspaper to which Congress gave a loan of over Rs 90 crore – Swamy made a fleeting mention of Rs 1,600 cr figure too in his diatribe.
Addressing a press conference here, he said Sonia and Rahul had floated a Section 25 company called ‘Young Indian’ each with a share holding of 38 per cent, which acquired Associated Journals, founded by late Jawaharlal Nehru, that published the National Herald and Quami Awaz.
Swamy said Associated Journals obtained an unsecured loan of over Rs 90 crore from AICC which he claimed was illegal under Income Tax Act because a political party cannot give loans for commercial purposes.
Anti-corruption crusader and Janata Party (JP) president Subramanian Swamy on Thursday referred to a ‘mining scam’ in Goa and said that when present homeminister P Chidambaram was the finance minister between 2004 and 2007, he fiddled with export duties on mining ore so that mining companies like Vedanta reaped huge profits.
On a visit to Goa, Swamy addressed mediapersons and said the scam is worth around 16,000 crore. When he gets more time from his present engagement with the 2G scam, he will pursue the issue against Chidambaram, Swamy said.
The JP chief praised the movement spearheaded by Anna Hazare and expressed his willingness to join it, but said that Hazare and his team were focused totally on one piece of legislation – the Jan Lokpal bill.
Swamy said that he has proved that even without the Jan Lokpal bill, his Action Committee Against Corruption in India (ACACI) can get results, as evident from the results in the 2G scam so far.
He said the ACACI is now focusing on money stashed abroad. It has already given a 15-page complaint to the CBI asking it to file an FIR. “But the CBI has not filed the FIR even after one month. If and when it does, the ACACI will take the FIR to a criminal court and get a letter-rogatory. With that letter, the ACACI will go abroad and obtain details about the money stashed in foreign countries,” Swamy said.
He said that while the ACACI has provided names of politicians who have such foreign bank accounts, the French government has provided 788 names of Indians and the German government provided 16 such names.
“But the government of India is not prosecuting these people. If the CBI does not file the FIR by January 1, I will go to the Supreme Court asking it to direct the CBI to do so, like I did in the Raja case when the Prime Minister did not give me sanction,” Swamy said.
He said he has filed 17 files corruption cases against Chidambaram. These include irregularities in stock market and various other cases. “But my busy engagement with present cases is preventing me from pursuing the case”
Now, the scam that involves Rs.35,000 Crores is ,as expected growing involving Former UPA Minister Union of State ,Santosh Bargodia( 2006),who is expected to be arrested.
In the meanwhile, an Official in the Mining Ministry in Goa has revealed the details of the scam.This is being debated in TimeNow Channel to-night,Watch it.(24 September,2012)
CBI has also ordered the widening of the scope of the scam involving the NDA period.
Hope this does not detract the main case by mudslinging by the UPA and the NDA!
And let not the arrests end at the level of the junior officials and political non entities.
“The CBI has decided to expand its probe into coalgate bringing under its scanner all coal block allocations made since 1993 including the six-year NDA rule after a reference in this regard was received from the CVC on Monday.
Last week, coal minister Shriprakash Jaiswal wrote to Central Vigilance Commission seeking a CBI probe into all the coal blocks allocated since 1993 when the government had started allocation to private players for captive use.
Seeking the CBI probe, Jaiswal has also recently forwarded a letter written by seven parliamentarians to the CVC saying that blocks allotted between 1993 and 2004 including those given during the NDA rule should be investigated by the CBI, as allegedly favours were done to parties under political pressure.
The letter of MPs also sought for enquiry as to what system the government of India put in place for selection of companies for coal block allocation between 1993 to 2004 and whether these guidelines were followed and how were joint venture partners selected.
The CVC on Monday referred the complaints to the CBI to probe the matter and the agency will soon begin its investigation on it, CBI sources said.
The allocation of coal blocks to private companies for captive use started in 1993 when Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1973 was ammended with the objective of attracting private investments in specified end uses such as power, cement and steel because of growing economy.
In its ongoing probe, CBI has so far registered seven FIRs against private companies and unknown public officials for alleged misrepresentation of facts.
“Till March 2011, the ministry of coal has allocated 194 coal blocks for captive mining of which 142 were explored blocks and the balance 52 were either regionally explored or unexplored coal blocks,” Comptroller and Auditor General has said in its recent report on coal block allocation.
In what can at best be described as funny logic The Supreme Court refused to entertain the plea of Dr.Dr.Subramanian Swamy to include the present and the then Finance Minister P.Chidambaram in the 2G Spectrum case where the Government has been defrauded to the tune of Rs.1,86,000 Crore.
“1) The top court has found the petitions not maintainable and dismissed the requests of petitioners Janata Party chief Subramanian Swamy and lawyer-activist Prashant Bhushan that Mr Chidambaram be investigated for his alleged role in the telecom scam. Mr Chidambaram was Finance Minister in 2008, when then Telecom Minister A Raja allegedly gifted mobile network licenses and frequency to ineligible companies.
2) Mr Swamy’s petition said that Mr Chidambaram must be made a co-accused in the 2G scam case. His contention was that the minister must be held responsible for allowing the telecom scam on his watch as Finance Minister.
3) Mr Swamy said that Mr Chidambaram was aware of Mr Raja’s actions. On matters like the pricing of spectrum, he should have intervened to protect the country’s interests, Mr Swamy has argued.
4) A special CBI court had rejected Mr Swamy’s request in February this year and he had appealed to the Supreme Court against that verdict.
5) The other petition had been filed by leading lawyer and anti-corruption activist Prashant Bhushan on behalf of the Centre for Public Interest Litigation, a non-governmental organisation. It sought a CBI investigation into Mr Chidambaram’s alleged role in the 2G scam.
6) Mr Bhushan’s petition alleged that Mr Chidambaram as Finance Minister overruled his officers who favoured the auction of spectrum. Mr Bhushan also said that Mr Chidambaram allowed two companies that were allegedly shown undue favour by Mr Raja, to sell stake to foreign investors at massive profits on the basis of licences that they had got at hefty bargains. The companies – Swan and Unitech Wireless – have said no rules were violated because they did not sell their stake but created additional equity. Swan partnered with UAE-based Etisalat and Unitech with Norwegian company Telenor. The government has said that both companies operated within the parameters of the law in those partnerships.
7) Early this year, the Supreme Court cancelled 122 licences issued by Mr Raja and said that spectrum should have been auctioned instead of being given at no extra cost along with licences. 2G or second generation spectrum will now be auctioned this year on the court’s orders. A Raja spent about a year in jail before being granted bail. ”
The Supreme Court seems to have stated in its Judgement(as reported by Times Now TV to-day), is that the mere fact that there might be some evidence here and there, it is not sufficient, to implicate Chidambaram in the 2G case.
It may be a fact that Chidambaram might have met the DoT officials.
It does not amount to Criminal Conspiracy.
The repeated use of the term,’Criminal Conspiracy’- does it mean that there is conspiracy, though not Conspiratorial in nature?Yes, when a meeting involves a scam, the Finance Minister discussed among other things the 2 G in the passing, thereby Chidambaram , the astute Lawyer that he is has provided himself with an excellent alibi.
I wrote on July 12, 2011 that
”
The Finance ministry was aware that there was something amiss in granting of licenses of 2G.
This is proved by the fact that the MoF had written to telecom ministry.
This was not followed up.
When suitable reply has not been received from the Ministry,Chidambaram should have taken it up with the GoM or the PM.
Now we find that there are ‘Non paper Decisions’(new term for unlawful decisions), and that there were no records kept for the meeting of Raja and Chidambaram.
All tis point out to acquiescence if not active participation of Chidambaram.
As I have noted in my earlier blog,is this a quid pro quo for manipulation of last Parliament elections, about which a case is pending.
2G scam runs deep.
It appears to lead towards PMO as well as Sonia Gandhi.
Despite clear indications the media is shy of mentioning either name .
Worse still PM is considered Honest and even called as ‘hands on PM’!
The Honorable judges must be aware of these facts and there were leaks in the Media on the ‘Paperless Discussions’ among Raja,Chidambaram.9 the leaks were from the PMO )
Probably they discussed what they would have for Lunch.
Now the Government has shredded the entire Tapes of Radia.
It is much easier for the Supreme Court to declare there is no evidence of 2 G linking to politicians and the Corporates.
Raja will be laughing heartily, as this opens new doors for him.
Viva la Justice!
“the trail of those who leaked the Niira Radia tapes could have been lost forever had not the Supreme Court decided to keep a copy with itself. The Centre on Thursday informed the Supreme Court that it has destroyed the entire Radia tapes, publication of excerpts from which threw the spotlight on ways of doing business as well as the tendency of security agencies to violate privacy of citizens.
The government said under Rule 419(A) of Indian Telegraph Rules, the intercepting agency was mandated to maintain and safely keep the intercepts for six months and thereafter destroy them if no action was required to be taken on the basis of the contents of the intercepts. The Radia intercepts were destroyed as no action was required to be taken on the tapes.
You must be logged in to post a comment.