02-11-2009, 01:30 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><b>Centre told us to save Mulayam: CBI</b>
pioneer.com
Abraham Thomas | New Delhi
Agency has sold its soul, say legal luminaries
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) acted under the Centreâs directive in seeking to bail out Samajwadi Party chief Mulayam Singh Yadav in the disproportionate assets case. The CBIâs admission in the Supreme Court on Tuesday sent shock waves among legal luminaries, with s<b>enior advocate KTS Tulsi even saying the CBI âhas sold its soulâ.</b>
Making the startling disclosure, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Mohan Parasaran said the CBI's plea to withdraw an earlier letter for Mulayamâs prosecution was based on the Union Law Ministryâs instructions.
<span style='color:red'>The shocking revelation is another low in the disgraceful history of an organisation that has invited regular criticism for being a âpuppetâ of the Central Government. The CBIâs role in Bofors accused Ottavio Quattorocchiâs escape and de-freezing of his London accounts, its refusal to challenge RJD chief Lalu Prasadâs acquittal in the fodder scam and its flip-flop on corruption cases against BSP supremo Mayawati have earned it a great deal of notoriety.</span>
On October 26, 2007, the agency had filed an application seeking permission to table its investigation report before the Supreme Court. The CBI had then held that there was prima facie evidence to nail Mulayam Singh and his kin in corruption cases. Those were the days when the SP and the Congress were on opposite sides of the political divide.
<b>But after the SP came closer to the UPA and bailed out the Manmohan Singh Government by voting in favour of the confidence motion, the CBI took an about-turn. On December 6, 2008, the agency filed an application to withdraw its earlier request to table charges against Mulayam, which could have led to his prosecution. The agency said it had received representation from Mulayam to reconsider the evidences and cited this reason for the flip-flop</b>.
âWe proceeded to take the view of the Law Minister whether to take action on Mulayamâs representations. We received opinion from the Law Ministry to withdraw the October 2007 application and file a fresh application dated November 26, 2008, which was filed in the court on December 6. On that opinion, we filed the fresh application,â the ASG added.
The CBIâs submission stunned the court, forcing the Bench of Justices Altamas Kabir and Cyriac Joseph to remark, âSo you were acting at the behest of the Law Ministry. You were not acting independently. What you just now said is something unusual.â
Digging deeper, the Bench asked, âIs this the only case where the CBI has followed the practice of referring for opinion to the Law Ministry or has it been resorting to this in the past also?â The ASG replied, âIn the past also, we have referred (cases) for their opinion⦠I have stated the facts as they are.â
The Bench sought to know what stopped the agency from approaching the court on considering the representations. It was on March 1, 2007, that the apex court had directed the CBI to investigate into the disproportionate assets of Mulayam, his two sons Akhilesh and Prateek, and daughter-in-law Dimple on a PIL filed by one Vishwanath Chaturvedi. âWhy did you go to the Central Government? Why didnât you approach us?â the Bench asked.
It also asked, âWhen the investigation was completed and you received additional material, does anything stand in way of your examining it?â The ASG replied in the negative. This gave the court sufficient proof to hold the CBI at fault.
Finding itself in a rather sticky position, Solicitor General GE Vahanvati chose to remain neutral. Appearing for the Centre, he clarified, âWe donât want to take any decision in this matter. Let the CBI consider the representation and submit report to the court."
<b>The CBI's admission, however, gave sufficient ammunition to petitioner Chaturvedi and Mulayam and his kin to take potshots at the agency's foul play.</b>
............
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That is why I say , Sonia and Moron Singh had converted India into Banana Republic. Indian Embasies , CBI are working for 10 Janpath not for India or Indian citizen who pay these low life crooks salaries. Traitors.
pioneer.com
Abraham Thomas | New Delhi
Agency has sold its soul, say legal luminaries
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) acted under the Centreâs directive in seeking to bail out Samajwadi Party chief Mulayam Singh Yadav in the disproportionate assets case. The CBIâs admission in the Supreme Court on Tuesday sent shock waves among legal luminaries, with s<b>enior advocate KTS Tulsi even saying the CBI âhas sold its soulâ.</b>
Making the startling disclosure, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Mohan Parasaran said the CBI's plea to withdraw an earlier letter for Mulayamâs prosecution was based on the Union Law Ministryâs instructions.
<span style='color:red'>The shocking revelation is another low in the disgraceful history of an organisation that has invited regular criticism for being a âpuppetâ of the Central Government. The CBIâs role in Bofors accused Ottavio Quattorocchiâs escape and de-freezing of his London accounts, its refusal to challenge RJD chief Lalu Prasadâs acquittal in the fodder scam and its flip-flop on corruption cases against BSP supremo Mayawati have earned it a great deal of notoriety.</span>
On October 26, 2007, the agency had filed an application seeking permission to table its investigation report before the Supreme Court. The CBI had then held that there was prima facie evidence to nail Mulayam Singh and his kin in corruption cases. Those were the days when the SP and the Congress were on opposite sides of the political divide.
<b>But after the SP came closer to the UPA and bailed out the Manmohan Singh Government by voting in favour of the confidence motion, the CBI took an about-turn. On December 6, 2008, the agency filed an application to withdraw its earlier request to table charges against Mulayam, which could have led to his prosecution. The agency said it had received representation from Mulayam to reconsider the evidences and cited this reason for the flip-flop</b>.
âWe proceeded to take the view of the Law Minister whether to take action on Mulayamâs representations. We received opinion from the Law Ministry to withdraw the October 2007 application and file a fresh application dated November 26, 2008, which was filed in the court on December 6. On that opinion, we filed the fresh application,â the ASG added.
The CBIâs submission stunned the court, forcing the Bench of Justices Altamas Kabir and Cyriac Joseph to remark, âSo you were acting at the behest of the Law Ministry. You were not acting independently. What you just now said is something unusual.â
Digging deeper, the Bench asked, âIs this the only case where the CBI has followed the practice of referring for opinion to the Law Ministry or has it been resorting to this in the past also?â The ASG replied, âIn the past also, we have referred (cases) for their opinion⦠I have stated the facts as they are.â
The Bench sought to know what stopped the agency from approaching the court on considering the representations. It was on March 1, 2007, that the apex court had directed the CBI to investigate into the disproportionate assets of Mulayam, his two sons Akhilesh and Prateek, and daughter-in-law Dimple on a PIL filed by one Vishwanath Chaturvedi. âWhy did you go to the Central Government? Why didnât you approach us?â the Bench asked.
It also asked, âWhen the investigation was completed and you received additional material, does anything stand in way of your examining it?â The ASG replied in the negative. This gave the court sufficient proof to hold the CBI at fault.
Finding itself in a rather sticky position, Solicitor General GE Vahanvati chose to remain neutral. Appearing for the Centre, he clarified, âWe donât want to take any decision in this matter. Let the CBI consider the representation and submit report to the court."
<b>The CBI's admission, however, gave sufficient ammunition to petitioner Chaturvedi and Mulayam and his kin to take potshots at the agency's foul play.</b>
............
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That is why I say , Sonia and Moron Singh had converted India into Banana Republic. Indian Embasies , CBI are working for 10 Janpath not for India or Indian citizen who pay these low life crooks salaries. Traitors.