From Eidi to ED

Changing Political Discourse – From ‘Eidi’ to ED

After observing the Eid-ul-Fitr last week, India’s nearly 200 million Muslims have presumably joined the din of elections. Straddling the two events, this is a modest, snapshot attempt to see what has seemingly changed and what has not.

Muslims are part of the 960 million-plus electorate. Issues peculiar to their community – sectarian violence, hijab, beef and much else – may remain high on the minds, but provide no clue about the impact they may have on the elections’ outcome. One can at best try to capture the mood discernible on Eid with the help of media reports, some confirmed and sourced, others being mere thoughts on social media and depending on records, draw some comparisons.

Not for the first time though, some newspapers found it both convenient, even advisable in the heat of the ongoing election campaign, to project not the politicos but film stars, on their front pages. Shah Rukh Khan was on the front pages greeting his admirers from the balcony of his Mumbai home: “EID Mubarak, Everyone.” This may have helped spread the message that Eid was “for everyone.”

This ‘everyone’ bit also seemed to go well with social media platforms to whom the traditional/mainstream media have ceded space. No-holds-barred reflecting there – serious, provocative, light or humorous – widens the discourse.

More non-Muslims than usual appeared to post Eid greetings to “my Muslim Friends”, conveying an unspoken empathy. The generally divisive hate campaign against this community or that, which has been on the increase, abated, even if briefly. The elections injected it back, though, by the time this is written.

This was the first Eid when ‘Eidi’, the gift the Muslim elders give to younger friends and family members, got mixed with ‘ED’, the government’s Enforcement Directorate that is prosecuting many an opposition leader – selectively, the critics at home and abroad say, to disrupt their election campaigns. As the issue is debated in the highest court of the land, the Eidi-ED memes filled the social media.

A popular Bollywood actor thought of repeating an old caricature of a Hindu from Haryana greeting a Muslim acquaintance:“Bhai Tanney Eid Ki Ram Ram”. Irrespective of the occasion, unlike in the cities where people wish each other by the hour of the day, greeting someone with “Ram Ram” is common in the countryside, especially in northern India.

These were soothing touches amidst the poll-time rhetoric. “Ghar mein ghus kar martey hain (killing after entering homes) is surely meant for the terrorists and their mentors, which they rightly deserve. But when political opponents are accused of having a “Mughal mindset” and are lambasted for “eating meat during the Shravan month”, the connotation and the ambit of the remarks and their targets, get widened, at least in the public perception.

ALSO READ: What You Could Expect in Five More Years of Modi

Delhi’s Shaheen Bagh, the venue of anti-CAA protests by Muslims, and the political heat they generated some years ago, was this year the hub for food stalls during Ramzan. It rivalled the Jama Masjid area in the walled city. Food lovers of all faiths thronged both venues.

Muslims praying on open grounds is an old, often contentious issue. Delhi’s Lieutenant Governor VK Saxena expressed ‘gratitude’ that there was no namaaz on the road for the first time. He was happy that this helped the authorities to “ensure that any eventuality of a flare-up by miscreants or vested interests was averted.”

The times are changing. The politics of hosting Iftars which was once an important part of the Ramzan, went missing. Like the Shaheen Bagh protests, Iftar was disrupted by Covid-19. Now, with Hindutva in focus, political parties shied away from hosting Iftar parties.

In political terms, an Iftar party is aimed at spreading a message of communal harmony. Clerics, diplomats and political leaders rising above party affiliations would come together and break bread. Meant to facilitate the Muslims, they were attended by all. It created a sense of mutual trust.

Interestingly, diplomatic missions in New Delhi – the United States, Britain, Israel and Saudi Arabia among the many – continued with Iftars, while political parties, whether or not they marginalise the Muslim vote, were too busy electioneering.

The Samajwadi Party was known to host the biggest and best-attended Iftar party. Its founder Mulayam Singh Yadav would personally attend to guests. In earlier days his trusted aide Amar Singh supervised the catering. When Yadav was the Defence Minister, food came from Akash, the Indian Air Force mess. The menu on the table was lavish.

This year, Akhilesh Yadav, the present chief, party sources privately conceded, was wary of hosting an Iftar party lest his rivals brand him “anti-Hindu”. However, Akhilesh attended Iftaar parties hosted by others.

The Congress regularly hosted Iftaar parties earlier. In recent years though, the party has abandoned the tradition. Insiders claim it is short of funds, while critics blame it on its silently pursuing “soft Hindutva”. Its leaders vehemently deny this. But undoubtedly, the political parameters are set by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

Iftar parties were started in Uttar Pradesh in the early seventies by the then Chief Minister Hemvati Nandan Bahuguna. Thereafter, they became an annual tradition. In the changed times, Bahuguna’s children are in the BJP.

The only time that the BJP hosted an Iftar party, old records say, was when Rajnath Singh was the Uttar Pradesh chief minister. He is now the Defence Minister. Other BJP leaders have avoided playing host on such occasions. The party as such views it as part of the Muslims’ ‘appeasement’.

What about the top dignitaries? Indira and Rajiv Gandhi hosted Iftar parties. So did Deve Gowda and I K Gujral. Leaders Ram Vilas Paswan, Rajesh Pilot, Jaipal Reddy and others played hosts.

One recalls the guests donning keffiyehs, turbans and ‘topi’ – like kashti, Turkish, Afghani – at Iftar parties Atal Bihari Vajpayee hosted at the plush Hyderabad House. Leaders of different faiths, diplomats and politicians of all hues attended. Vajpayee’s liberal face came through with his donning of green headgear.

The occasion was essentially for Muslims, but by the time they finished with the prayer to be able to break their fast, the food would be devoured and replenishments would be needed.

As President, APJ Abdul Kalam, a Muslim, if not hosting an official Iftar, would donate funds to some charitable cause or disaster fund.

The change began in 2014. PM Modi skipped Iftars hosted by President Pranab Mukherjee. And then, the practice ended. Electoral compulsions have set in as the ruling BJP calls it “appeasement politics” and condemn anyone who engaged in it. Its target this year was an ally, Bihar Chief Minister Nitish Kumar.

Call it cynicism if you will. But the growing feeling of ‘otherness’ has led sections of the Muslims to think that the political Iftars of the past made the community too complacent to see through the ‘tokenism’.

The end of Iftar politics, applauded by those who support the present dispensation, is silently mourned by secularists who see it as an attack on India’s pluralistic ethos – the “Idea of India”.

Nazia Erum, the author of Mothering A Muslim writes: “Keeping it simple – the Iftar is meant to be a moment of spirituality. Ramzan and Iftar will come and go – but their achievement lies in helping you and your fellow human beings to introspect on how we are being led astray from loving and belonging together, by forces of politics and by the games of power.

To Erum, “The truth is, nothing would probably please God more than closing this gap of hatred and mistrust between fellow humans.”

For more details visit us: https://lokmarg.com/

Arvind Kejriwal

My Husband Will Reveal Truth: Kejriwal’s Wife

The wife of jailed Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, Sunita on Wednesday said that her husband, who is in the custody of the Enforcement Directorate (ED) in connection with the alleged excise scam, will reveal the truth regarding the case in court on March 28.

Kejriwal will be produced before the court on Thursday at the end of his ED custody in Delhi excise policy money laundering case.

In a video message, Sunita Kejriwal hit out at the Centre and central probe agency, saying that the ED could not find a single penny in its more than 250 raids conducted in the “so-called liquor scam”.

“In the so-called liquor scam, ED has conducted more than 250 raids. They are searching for the money of this so-called scam. They have found nothing yet. Arvind Kejriwal has said that he will reveal everything in court on March 28. He will reveal where the money of the liquor scam is. He will also provide proof…” she said.

Sunita has met the Delhi CM on Tuesday evening at the ED office.

“I met Arvind Kejriwal in jail yesterday, he has diabetes and sugar level is not under control. However, his determination is strong. Two days ago, he directed Delhi Minister Atishi to resolve the water and sewer-related issues. What wrong did he do? The Centre has filed a case against Arvind Kejriwal even for this. Do they want to finish Delhi?” she added.

The Aam Aadmi Party’s National Convenor was arrested on March 21 for alleged misdoings in the now-scrapped Delhi Excise policy case under an ongoing money laundering probe by the ED. He is in ED custody till March 28.

The case relates to alleged irregularities and money laundering in the formulation and execution of the Delhi excise policy in 2022.In its initial prosecution complaint filed in November 2021, the ED stated that the policy was intentionally designed with loopholes, facilitating the formation of cartels clandestinely to favor AAP leaders.

Additionally, the ED accused AAP leaders of receiving kickbacks from a group of individuals referred to as the “South Group.”

The case originated from a report presented by Delhi Chief Secretary Naresh Kumar to Lieutenant Governor (LG) Vinai Kumar Saxena in July 2022, highlighting purported procedural deficiencies in the development of the policy.

The report said “arbitrary and unilateral decisions” taken by Sisodia in his capacity as Excise Minister had resulted in “financial losses to the exchequer” estimated at more than Rs 580 crore.This report was referred to the CBI, and led to Sisodia’s arrest.

While Kejriwal was not named in the FIRs registered by the ED or the Central Bureau of Investigation in the Delhi excise policy case, his name first found a mention in the ED’s chargesheet, wherein the agency claimed that he allegedly spoke to one of the main accused, Sameer Mahendru, in a video call and asked him to continue working with co-accused and AAP communications-in-charge Vijay Nair. (ANI)

For more details visit us: https://lokmarg.com/

Mahua Moitra

ED Issues 2nd Summons To Mohua

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) on Monday issued a second summons to Trinamool Congress leader Mahua Moitra in connection with irregularities in a foreign exchange contravention case asking her to join the probe on March 11.

The fresh summons followed the earlier one when she skipped the investigation and did not appear before the investigators on February 19.

Moitra has been asked to appear before the agency’s headquarters in Delhi with some documents related to some foreign investments.

The agency wants to question Moitra in the case under the provisions of the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA), 1999.

The ED investigators want to record her statement linked to the case.

The 49-year-old politician is being probed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) too and it is conducting a preliminary inquiry into the allegations against her on the reference from the Lokpal.

It is learnt that the ED case is based on the reference of the CBI case.

Moitra has been in controversy since Bharatiya Janata Party MP Nishikant Dubey accused her of asking questions in the Lok Sabha to target the Adani Group and Prime Minister Narendra Modi at the behest of businessman Darshan Hiranandani in exchange for gifts.

Dube had also accused Moitra of compromising national security for monetary gains.

Moitra was expelled as a Lok Sabha Member of Parliament (MP) on December 8 following the Ethics panel’s determination of her guilt in the ‘cash-for-query’ case. Moitra has denied any wrongdoing and claimed she was being targeted as she had raised questions on the deals of the Adani Group.

“Neither has Lok Pal uploaded any referral order on the website as per the Lokpal Act and nor has CBI put out anything official. ‘Sources’ telling journos as per usual media circus. Hope Rs 13,000 crore Adani coal scam merits CBI PE before my witchhunt,” Moitra had said on X in November.

Moitra had also approached the Supreme Court challenging her expulsion from the lower house of Parliament in connection with the ‘cash-for-query’ allegations. (ANI)

For more details visit us: https://lokmarg.com/

Chanpreet Singh

Delhi HC Issues Notice To ED On Sanjay Singh’s Bail Plea

The Delhi High Court on Monday issued notice to the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on a regular bail plea moved by Aam Aadmi Party’s senior leader Sanjay Singh in a money laundering case related to an alleged Delhi excise policy scam case.

Sanjay Singh was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate in the case on October 4, 2023.

The bench of Justice Swarna Kanta Sharma while seeking a response from ED, fixed January 29, 2023, for the next date of hearing.

Sanjay Singh through plea stated that he is neither an accused nor a suspect in a scheduled/predicate offence (CBI Offence), wherein, the investigation has been continuing since 17.8.2022 and despite 3 Charge-Sheets/ Supplementary Charge-Sheets having been filed, absolutely nothing has surfaced against him till date.

Bail Plea further stated that at the outset, the Applicant states that the Applicant is not guilty of any criminal wrongdoing or any violation of the provisions of the PMLA in any manner whatsoever and therefore, the Applicant’s life and liberty must be protected from unwarranted and unjustified encroachment at the hands of the DoE based on a false, malicious and motivated case without any merit.

On December 22, 2023, the trial court dismissed his bail and said, “The Court is of prima facie view that the case against him is genuine. Evidence shows his involvement in the alleged offence of money laundering. There are reasonable grounds for believing that he is guilty of the alleged offence of money laundering.”

Special Judge MK Nagpal expressed his prima facie view and said, “The evidence and material show involvement of the applicant in the commission of the alleged offence of money laundering because he is shown to have been, directly or indirectly, involved in the process or activities connected with proceeds of crime generated through the scheduled offences case of CBI.”

The court further said, ” The evidence and material are also sufficient to furnish this court reasonable grounds for believing that he is ‘guilty’ of the said offence in terms of provisions contained Under section 45 of the PMLA. It can be said that the conditions laid down by section 45 for the grant of bail are not satisfied.

While dismissing the bail application, the court had also said that it had approved by the Supreme Court that bribes in connection with the formulation of the Delhi excise policy were paid.

“It can also be observed by this court that the basic case of ED in the present ECIR stands approved upto the Supreme Court and it has been endorsed by the Apex Court that the bribe or kickbacks in connection with formulation of excise policy of the GNCTD for the year 2020 21 was/were paid and it was so approved by rejection of bail application of accused Manish Sisodia on merits by their Lordships of the said court,” special judge MK Nagpal said in the order.

The court had also said that even the bail applications of various other accused arrested in this case, namely Sameer Mahandru, Amit Arora, Vijay Nair, Arun Ramachandran Pillai, Amandeep Dhall and Abhishek Boinpally, have already been dismissed by this court in light of their involvement with the process and different activities relating to the said proceeds of crime and bail applications of some of these accused are now stated to be pending before the Supreme Court or before the High Court.

Thus, the observations made by this court regarding the interpretation of provisions of Section 45 and 50 of the PMLA, while dismissing the said bail application based on the legal position stated above, have yet not been overturned or set aside either by the High Court or by the Supreme Court, Special judge clarified in the order.

The special judge also noted that reliance was placed on the above order of the Supreme Court granting bail to the accused Benoy Babu in this case.

The court said that even in the said order of the Honorable Apex Court no contrary observations regarding the interpretation of the said provisions are found to have been made and even no parity can be drawn therefrom qua the applicant as the said accused was in custody in this case for the last around 13 months and his case on merits is also stated to have been different.

It was submitted by the Counsel for Sanjay Singh that no recovery of any part or portion of the amount of Rs. 2 crores allegedly paid to the applicant has been effected from his possession or even from his residence during such proceedings dated 04.10.2023. The court said that this is not material as such recovery is not always necessary to be effected.

It was also the submission of Senior Counsel that besides the above oral and documentary evidence, there is no other documentary evidence to show the trail connecting the applicant with the alleged proceeds of crime.

The court rejected the submission and said that even this submission of Senior Counsel cannot be given any weight at this stage as no such further documentary evidence constituting the trail thereof could have been possible to be collected or recovered by the investigating agencies since the alleged transactions constituting the generation of proceeds of crime were made in cash only and not through any documentary or electronic mode.

The court also rejected the submission of Senior Counsel for the applicant that the statements of the approver should not be considered as the same has been given by him under an inducement from or the influence of ED officials and on a promise of being tendered a pardon in case he gives an incriminating statement against some big politicians of AAP including the applicant.

The court said that even these submissions of Senior Counsel cannot be accepted at this stage. There is nothing to show from the record that the approver had acted under any coercion or influence of the ED officials.

The court also said that besides the evidence and material collected by ED in respect to delivery and payment of an amount of Rs 2 crores to the applicant by the approver Dinesh Arora, it has also been alleged that the applicant is even found to have played an important role towards the formulation of the excise policy of the GNCTD for the year 202021, i.e. previous to the year 2021- 22 in respect to which these cases were originally registered, and it is being stated that during the investigation, recovery of one unsigned MoU of 18.06.2020 has been effected.

The said MoU was to be executed between accused Amit Arora, approver Dinesh Arora and one Vivek Tyagi and it is alleged that through this MoU and some other related activities, an attempt was made by the applicant to generate proceeds of crime to offences committed in respect to the above said previous policy, the court noted.

It was stated that Vivek Tyagi was attempted to be inducted as a dummy partner by the applicant in the above firm named Aralias Hospitality belonging to the accused Amit Arora and a share of twenty per cent was sought to be secured for this dummy associate of the applicant.

The court observed, “It was done in lieu of extending favours to the accused Amit Arora in connection with formulation and implementation of the said policy for the previous year 2020-21, though, somehow, the said attempt could not succeed.

The statements of approver Dinesh Arora accused Amit Arora and witness Ankit Gupta, who was working as CA of approver Dinesh Arora, are being referred to this aspect along with statements of some other witnesses.

The court further said that it is also gathered from the above statements that though initially the above entity was sought to be created with only two partners, namely the approver Dinesh Arora and accused Amit Arora, the name of Vivek Tyagi was added later on and the statements of approver and the above other accused further show that it was done at the instance of this applicant only.

It is alleged by the agency that Vivek Tyagi is the current Personal Assistant of the applicant, the court noted in the order. (ANI)

For more details visit us: https://lokmarg.com/

Lalu Yadav's family ED

ED Attaches Assets Worth Over Rs 6 Cr To Lalu’s Family

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has attached assets worth over Rs 6 crore of many people linked to former Bihar Chief Minister Lalu Yadav’s family in the land for job scam, the sources said on Monday.

The sources from the federal agency said that the seized property includes properties in Patna and Ghaziabad as well.
The development comes nearly a month after the CBI, which is also probing the scam, filed a fresh charge sheet against former Bihar CM Lalu Prasad Yadav, his wife Rabri Devi, and his son and current deputy chief minister Tejashwi Yadav in connection with the case.

Recently, CBI has filed a chargesheet in a land-for-job alleged scam case of former Union Railway Minister Lalu Prasad Yadav naming Bihar’s Deputy Chief Minister Lalu Prasad Yadav and others including Tejashwi Yadav etc.

According to the CBI, this is the 2nd chargesheet in the Designated Court against 17 accused including the then Union Minister of Railways, his wife, son, then GM of West Central Railways(WCR), then two CPOs of WCR, private persons, private company etc. in a case related to Land for Job Scam.

CBI had registered a case on May 18, 2022, against the then Union Minister of Railways and 15 others including his wife, two daughters and unknown public servants and private persons.

It was alleged that the then Union Minister of Railways during the period 2004-2009 had obtained pecuniary advantages in the form of transfer of landed property in the name of his family members etc. in lieu of appointment of Substitutes in Group “D” Post in different Zones of Railways.

It was further alleged that in lieu thereof the substitutes, who were residents of Patna themselves or through their family members sold & gifted their land situated at Patna in favour of the family members of said Minister and a private company controlled by his family members, which was also involved in transfer of such immovable properties in the name of said family members. (ANI)

Read More: http://13.232.95.176/

Chanpreet Singh

Judicial Custody of Supertech’s Chairman Extended Till Aug7

Delhi’s Patiala House Court on Monday extended Supertech’s Chairman RK Arora’s judicial custody till August 7. He was recently arrested by the Enforcement Directorate in connection with money laundering case.

On Monday, RK Arora was presented before Delhi’s Patiala House Court’s judge Additional Sessions Judge Devender Kumar Jangala after the end of his Judicial custody period.
The Court also fixed date of hearing on August 7 for an arguement on an application filed by accused seeking copy of grounds of arrest which is pending. Reply to said application has been filed by ED.

It was submitted by accused’s counsel that in absence of grounds of arrest given to accused the accused is not able to move an effective bail application.

Earlier while sending Arora to ED remand, Court said that “The power to seek remand is essentially a part of the power of arrest and to conduct investigation in respect to commission of the alleged offence of money laundering and this power has necessarily to be inferred with the help of above Section as Section 65 of the PMLA, 2002 does not prohibit remand of an accused under the said act to ED custody”.

The court also said that when it comes to power of the ED officers to seek ED custody of the accused, it had observed that though Section 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) do not confer any specific power in this regard, but this power has to be inferred with the help of provisions contained in Section 65 of the PMLA, 2002 and Section 167 of CrPC as Section 65 of the PMLA provides that the provisions of CrPC shall apply, in so far as they are not inconsistent with the provisions of this Act, to arrest, search and seizure, attachment, confiscation, investigation, prosecution and all other proceedings.

“It is contended on behalf of accused that the present ECIR was registered in the year 2021 and the applicant has been repeatedly examined by the investigating agency and after completion of investigation provisional attachment order dated 11.04.2023 has been issued and hence there was no requirement of arrest. The issuance of provisional attachment order by the competent authority does not means that the investigation qua the offences defined under Section 3 punishable under Section 4 of PMLA has been completed,” the court noted.

It has been specifically stated by the ED that the investigation for commission of offence punishable under Section 3/4 of PMLA is not yet complete, therefore the Enforcement Directorate is justified to seek custody of the applicant/accused, the court said.

However, the court had earlier directed that his interrogation shall be conducted at some place having CCTV coverage in accordance with the guidelines laid down by the Supreme Court and also in accordance with all the other applicable rules, directions and guidelines on the subject and the said CCTV footage shall be preserved.

Earlier, ED has apprised the court that 26 FIRS were registered by EOW, Delhi Police; Haryana Police and UP Police against Supertech Limited and its group companies under Section 120B (criminal conspiracy) read with 406(criminal breach of trust)/420 (cheating)/467/471 IPC having allegations of cheating atleast 670 home buyers for an amount of Rs 164 Crores. ED also alleged that the amount collected by Supertech Ltd was diverted to their group companies for purchase of properties and the company with land having much lesser value.

ED alleged that the accused persons have acquired properties, made illegal/wrongful gain arising out the said proceeds of crime by involving, indulging and commissioning of criminal activities related to scheduled offences.

It is stated that the prima facie case for commission of offence punishable under Section 3 punishable under Section 4 of the PML Act has been made out.

Arora’s defence lawyer RK Handoo opposed the plea and submitted that his client has been illegally arrested and no grounds of arrest have been furnished.

He also apprised the court that present ECIR was registered in the year 2021 and the applicant has been repeatedly examined by the investigating agency and after completion of investigation provisional attachment order dated April 11, 2023 has been issued. That once the investigation has already been completed, therefore was no requirement of arrest, the defence lawyer said.

He further submitted that the offences of Enforcement Directorate are not the police officers, under law, therefore, the enforcement directorate is not entitled for custody remand of the applicant/accused. (ANI)

Read More: http://13.232.95.176/

Sujit Patkar In Covid Centre Scam

ED Arrests Raut’s Aide Sujit Patkar In Covid Centre Scam

The Enforcement Directorate(ED) has made the first arrests in the BMC (Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation) Covid Center scam case.

According to ED officials, Sujit Patkar, a close aide of Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Sanjay Raut and a civic doctor Kishore Bisure have been arrested.
Patkar and Bisure will be produced in a special Prevention of Money Laundering Act court later today.

Earlier in June ED raided 15 locations in Mumbai in connection with the alleged BMC Covid centre scam case and seized cash and documents of properties worth crores, according to ED sources.

The case is linked to a money laundering case against Sujit Patkar.

The ED source said that Patkar is the kingpin of the scam. He is one of the four partners of Lifeline Hospital Management Services that was awarded the contract to run a Covid-19 jumbo centre in Worli.

The ED said that Rs 22 crore was allegedly laundered via shell companies for which Patkar played an instrumental role.

ED had seized Rs 68.65 lakh in cash during the raid. Documents of 50 immovable properties located at various places in Maharashtra with a market value of more than Rs 150 crore, fixed deposits and investments worth Rs 15 crore and jewelery worth Rs 2.46 crore have also been recovered.

According to the sources, ED had also seized several mobile phones and laptops along with many incriminating documents.

The search revealed that one company was giving body bags for dead COVID-19 patients to another company for Rs 2,000. That company was giving the same body bags to the Central Procurement Department for Rs 6,800 and this contract was signed by the then BMC mayor, said the sources in the ED. (ANI)

Read More: http://13.232.95.176/

India Has to do Much More to Attract Global Investment

Last week the Taiwanese electronics manufacturers and prominent supplier to Apple announced that it was pulling out of India and shelving its plans to set up a plant to make semiconductors jointly with Indian conglomerate, Vedanta. It was a big setback. The Foxconn project, envisaged with an investment of nearly $20 billion, was touted as a big breakthrough to India’s Make in India and Self-reliant India drives, both pet missions of Prime Minister Narendra Modi to boost manufacturing in India and the country’s value-added exports. 

Foxconn, which is the world’s largest contract electronics manufacturer, was to have set up its joint venture plant in Modi’s home state of Gujarat and once up and running it would have employed an estimated 100,000 people.

Why Foxconn decided to pull out of the project is not known in detail. However, media reports suggest that the decision has to do with the quantum of incentives that the project was supposed to receive.

Foxconn’s about-face shows that India’s ambitious objective of emerging as a globally relevant manufacturing base will not be easy to achieve. A lot more needs to be done. And they need to be done fast. 

Opportunities have opened up for potential manufacturing locations in the world after the West and multinational corporations have begun rethinking their China strategy. China and the US are in the midst of a face-off that has economic and commercial implications for both countries. Western companies are also peeved at the increased restrictions and controls that the Chinese government has been imposing on their activities in China. 

However, if India wants a piece of the action by attracting big investments in manufacturing, it will have to go the extra mile. 

In the Foxconn instance, the concerns may have been about delays by the Indian government to approve incentives that the project was entitled to. Apparently, the government agencies had raised questions about the cost estimates of the project. These values determined the quantum of incentives that the project was to receive.

India is coming late to the global manufacturing game and although China might be losing its sheen as a favoured player there, the competition is by no means a cakewalk. Tiny Vietnam has scored more points when it comes to attracting investment that is looking for destinations other than China. India, simply, has to do much more.

Furore over an extension for India’s ED

India’s Enforcement Directorate (ED) is a domestic law enforcement and economic intelligence agency responsible for enforcing economic laws and fighting economic crime in India. As part of the finance ministry’s department of revenue, the directorate, headed by the Enforcement Director, is a powerful body that investigates and prosecutes cases involving foreign exchange law violations, money laundering, and other economic offences. By definition the ED needs to be fair and unbiased, not swayed by political pressure nor used with motivation other than the offences and violations that it is deemed to deal with.

However, the controversy right now is that the ED has been accused of being biased and politically motivated in its actions and investigations against some opposition leaders, activists, journalists, and businessmen. 

The controversy’s latest twist is that the current director, S.K. Mishra, has been given three extensions of his term by the central government since his appointment in October 2018. His original term was supposed to end in November 2020, but he was given a one-year extension till November 2021, and then another one-year extension till November 2022, and finally a third one-year extension till November 2023. 

The third extension was recently struck down by India’s Supreme Court as being illegal and invalid in law because it violated an earlier judgment that has directed the government not to extend Mishra’s term further. 

Instances where the government interferes or influences investigating agencies such as the ED, the Central Bureau of Investigation, and other bodies, are not uncommon in India. Neither are such instances of misuse related to any particular government or regime in power. Such biased “use” of agencies meant to act objectively have occurred during the tenure of successive governments in India, regardless of their political stripe. 

Curiously, hours after the Supreme Court struck down the third extension for Mishra, the home minister Amit Shah said in a tweet that “those rejoicing over the Hon’ble SC decision on the ED case are delusional for various reasons: The amendments to the CVC Act, which were duly passed by the Parliament, have been upheld. Powers of the ED to strike at those who are corrupt and on the wrong side of the law remain the same”. He added that the “ED is an institution which rises beyond any one individual”.

Some wondered why the home minister, whose ministry is responsible for the maintenance of internal security and domestic policy in the country, was commenting on the ED whose office is under the finance ministry.

Hearing to begin on Kashmir’s revoked autonomy

In 2019, in a quick decision, the Modi government revoked the Indian Constitution’s Article 370 in Kashmir. The Article gave the northern Indian state of Jammu & Kashmir a special status, which forbade Indians outside the state from permanently settling, buying land, holding local government jobs and securing education scholarships.

The Modi regime revoked the Article and split the state into two union territories, Kashmir and Jammu.

Last week, however, it was announced that the Supreme Court would begin hearing arguments related to an appeal against the abrogation of the Article. Opponents of the ruling regime believe the abrogation was unconstitutional in Kashmir, which is India’s only Muslim-majority region. But the move by the Centre to revoke the special status was seen as part of the Modi government’s attempt to consolidate its rule over the territory. The proceedings in the Supreme Court begin shortly and will be watched keenly

The floods in Delhi are not only because of rain

Last week as rains pounded north India, Delhi witnessed floods of a magnitude that had not occurred in 45 years. The levels of the River Yamuna rose, breached an all-time high and overflowed into the city flooding key roads. 

The authorities had to evacuate thousands of people in flood-prone areas and major traffic diversions had to be put in place. Nearly 100 people died because of the floods. TV footage showed flooded streets in the city, including the street outside Delhi’s chief minister Arvind Kejriwal’s home. Because of the floods, three water-treatment plants in the city have had to be closed down and Kejriwal said that water would have to be rationed–that means Delhi could face water shortages for a few days. 

Although the rainfall in Delhi has been heavy–Delhi, Punjab, and Himachal Pradesh have received 112%, 100% and 70% more rainfall than average so far–the floods are not all because of the rains. Systematic ecological degradation is to blame. The warnings have been coming in for a number of years now. 

Experts say large-scale encroachment of floodplains, the absence of wetlands and the presence of 25 bridges on the Yamuna River have contributed to the deluge. The rains are only the tipping point. In addition, the infrastructure, such as drainage systems, which is required to handle flooding, is in need of serious overhauling. 

Sadly, the red flags are raised only when the floods occur and when the rains subside, no one worries about them any longer.

Will Wagner Group get a new boss?

Not so long ago, all eyes were on Yevgeny Prigoshin, the head of Russia’s most prominent mercenary army, which played a crucial role in the country’s offensive against Ukraine. Prighozin led a sort of mutiny against the Kremlin when he led his troops towards Moscow–a move that was construed as a challenge to President Vladimir Putin’s regime.

The so-called attempted coup was defused and the troops retreated. Prigozhin is believed to be in St. Petersburg but his group of soldiers, recruited mainly from prisons, is no longer believed to be active in the ongoing war that has been going on for more than 500 days. 

Now, reports have emerged that Putin has proposed to the Wagner Group’ fighters that a senior mercenary, Andrey Troshev, be appointed as their new commander. According to reports emanating from mostly state-controlled media in Russia, Putin is attempting to create a split between Prighozin and his erstwhile fighters. 

Would this be a fresh lease on life for the Wagner Group and its involvement in Russia’s ongoing war against Ukraine? The unfolding events will tell.

ED On assets of Sisodia

ED Attaches Assets Worth Over Rs 52 cr Of Sisodia

Directorate of Enforcement (ED) has provisionally attached assets worth Rs 52.24 crore belonging to Manish Sisodia, Amandeep Singh Dhall, Rajesh Joshi, Gautam Malhotra and others in the Delhi Liquor Scam case.

According to an ED statement, the attached assets worth Rs. 52.24 Crore include immovable properties worth Rs. 7.29 Crore (02 immovable properties of Manish Sisodia/ Seema Sisodia, land/flat of Rajesh Joshi/Chariot Productions Media Pvt Ltd. and land/flat of Gautam Malhotra).
“The attachment also includes movable assets worth Rs. 44.29 Crore including bank balances of Manish Sisodia (Rs. 11.49 lakhs), Brindco Sales Pvt. Ltd. (Rs. 16.45 Crore) and others. It is the 2nd Provisional Attachment Order issued in this case. The 1st provisional attachment Order issued was issued for attachment of immovable/movable properties worth Rs. 76.54 Crore of Vijay Nair, Sameer Mahandru, Amit Arora, Arun Pillai and others”, the statement read.

As per the statement, the total attachment in the case is now Rs 128.78 Crore and the proceeds of crime involved in this case is at least Rs. 1934 Crore. In this case, ED had arrested 12 persons arrested so far and has filed 05 prosecution complaints.

Further investigation is in process.

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) on March 9 arrested former Delhi deputy chief minister Manish Sisodia in the liquor policy case, after hours of questioning at Tihar Jail.

Sisodia was arrested by the CBI earlier in its ongoing investigation of a case related to alleged irregularities in the framing and implementation of the excise policy of the National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCTD). (ANI)

Read More: http://13.232.95.176/

Delhi Court Sahul Judicial Custody

PFI Case: Delhi Court Remands Sahul To Judicial Custody

Delhi’s Patiala House Court on Thursday remanded Sahul Hameed to judicial custody who has been arrested by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) from Madurai in connection with a money laundering probe against a banned organisation namely Popular Front of India (PFI).

The Vacation judge Chhavi Kapoor remanded Sahul Hameed to judicial custody till July 6. The accused was produced before the court after the expiry of three days of ED custody.
Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) Naveen Kumar Matta for ED appeared for ED and submitted that an investigation is going on, accused may be remanded to judicial custody.

The fact of the case revolves around receiving higher money in violation of the law. It is alleged by the ED that the accused was operating from Singapore and was involved in the unlawful activities of the organisation.

While seeking an extension of remand on June 19, it was also submitted that the mobile phone of the accused contains relevant details which need to be confronted during the investigation.

According to the Enforcement Directorate, the accused was earlier in the process of collecting illegal money/terror funds from legitimate and illegitimate channels from Singapore and other places. He stated to have been deported to India. Upon receipt of inputs, he was intercepted and could not give an account of certain activities taken by him towards collecting funds for PFI.

ED counsels had informed the Court that the statement of the accused under section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act was also recorded wherein he remained evasive in giving answers to certain material aspects collected during the investigation. Therefore ED arrested the accused.

Earlier the accused was remanded to ten days in ED remand which was extended on Sunday for one day. Again the accused was produced before the court on Monday.

Recently, the Special Court took cognizance of a chargesheet (Prosecution Complaint) filed by the Enforcement Directorate against several office bearers of Popular Front of India (PFI) in a special court in Delhi.

The court had noted that funds were used for the purpose of unlawful activities, inciting violence, which was allegedly held in North East Delhi in Feb 2020.

According to the ED, the accused persons have revealed that they have played an active role in bogus cash donations on behalf of PFI and in claiming and projecting PFI’s unaccounted cash raised through unknown and suspicious sources as untainted and legitimate.

ED had stated that the PMLA investigation has revealed that as a part of a criminal conspiracy hatched by PFI office bearers over the past many years, suspicious funds from within the country and abroad have been raised by PFI and related entities and have been clandestinely remitted to India in a concealed manner and deposited in their bank accounts over the years.

Earlier in March, the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) Tribunal upheld the decision of the Central Government decision to ban Popular Front of India and its affiliates.

The Tribunal has dismissed the allegations levelled by the organisation that one particular community is being targeted by the government. The Tribunal while passing the Judgement noted that the members of PFI and its affiliates are indulging in secessionist activities which were contrary to the social fabric of the country.

In September last year, the Ministry of Home Affairs declared the Popular Front of India (PFI) and its affiliates as an ‘Unlawful Association’.

The press statement issued in this regard stated that the Popular Front of India (PFI) and its associates or affiliates/fronts have been found to be involved in serious offences, including terrorism and its financing, targeted gruesome killings, disregarding the constitutional set-up of the country, disturbing public order etc. which are prejudicial to the integrity, security and sovereignty of the country.

Therefore, the Ministry of Home Affairs found it necessary to curb the nefarious activities of the organization and has hence declared the Popular Front of India (PFI) along with its associates or affiliates or fronts including Rehab India Foundation (RIF), Campus Front of India (CFI), All India Imams Council (AIIC), National Confederation of Human Rights Organization (NCHRO), National Women’s Front, Junior Front, Empower India Foundation and Rehab Foundation, Kerala as an ‘unlawful association’ under the provisions of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. (ANI)

Read More: http://13.232.95.176/