Additional spectrum case: Court to hear matter on 6th February

Special CBI Judge O P Saini fixed the case for Friday after the defence counsel told the court that they needed some documents from CBI which were filed along with charge sheet.

The court asked the CBI to provide the documents as sought by the counsel for the accused. The agency has already supplied the copies of charge sheet and documents filed along with it to the accused.

The court was earlier informed that the Supreme Court has quashed the order summoning Bharti Cellular Ltd CMD Sunil Bharti Mittal and Essar Group promoter Ravi Ruia as accused in the case.

Hearing in the case was virtually stalled since April 26, 2013 interim order of the apex court which had said that proceedings against Mittal and Ruia, who had challenged trial court's summoning order, will remain "postponed" until further orders.

The apex court had cleared the decks for Mittal and Ruia by setting aside the order summoning them, observing that the principle of 'alter ego' has wrongly been applied by the trial judge in seeking presence of both the top corporate honchos as accused.

Read: Latest News in Hindi and Newspaper

Read More

JSPL connived with Coal ministry officials for excess mining, alleges CBI

The agency, which has incorporated these details in the FIR in the case, has alleged that the Ministry officials in connivance with the company not only overlooked the excess mining but also regularised it.
  
The case relates to the ongoing probe of the CBI into the coal scam in which it had registered an FIR against the company alleging that instead of adhering to the rate of extraction of coal as provided in the approved Mine Plan, the company had resorted to "illegal excess mining".
  
In the FIR, which has now been accessed, the agency has alleged that according to data available "on record" while the approved coal production during 1998-99 to 2002-03 was 1.35
MT, the actual coal production by the Company was 5.9 MT which is an excess of 4.55 MT (nearly 300 per cent above the sanctioned extraction) of coal mined "irregularly".
  
Defending its position, JSPL spokesperson claimed that the production schedules mentioned for the first five years in the Mine Plans were based on the guidelines mentioned under MCR 1960 Rule 22 (5) wherein the RQP (Registered Qualified Person) who prepares the mine plan gives a tentative scheme of mining and annual plan for excavation from year to year for five years.
  
The spokesperson said it may, therefore, be noted that as per the approved capacity of two million tonnes per annum production for the first five years was below the cumulative year wise capacity of 10 MT and hence there was no excess mining as alleged.

Read: News in Hindi and Newspaper

Read More

Coalscam: Court to consider CBI's closure report on 20th January

Special CBI Judge Bharat Parashar fixed the matter for consideration on January 20 after the probe agency filed the relevant documents pertaining to the case before the court.

"We have filed a complete closure report in the matter. We are filing all the relevant documents in the court," senior public prosecutor V K Sharma said.

The court was hearing the matter in which CBI had earlier lodged an FIR against Prakash Industries Ltd (PIL) and various others in connection with alleged irregularities in allocation of Chhattisgarh's Fatehpur coal block.

According to CBI, the Fatehpur coal block was allocated jointly to PIL and one other company by the 35th screening committee.

Source: Hindi News and Newspaper

Read More

Coalgate: BJP backs court order on recording Manmohan's statement, Congress reacts cautiously

"We had maintained back then also that the buck stops at the Prime Minister's Office because he was the Coal Minister then and today that is what the law has reiteratred," BJP Spokesperson Sambit Patra said.
  
Terming it as "due process", another BJP leader Nalin Kohli said, "The legal probe says something that applies equally to every citizen and there are no merits or demerits from that perspective. If the court does something within the legal process, that has to be followed".
  
The Congress said it would react only after "perusing" the court order.
  
"If at all the court has said something we should wait for the formal court order to come out. Only after perusing the court order will it be appropriate to comment on it," Congress leader Manish Tewari said.

Source: News in Hindi and Newspaper

Read More

CBI files case diary of coal scam involving Kumar Mangalam Birla, others

Two days after the court had directed it to furnish the case diary of the matter, the CBI submitted two bundles of documents in a sealed cover before the court.

"In compliance of the court's order, we are filing the crime folder as well as the case diary," senior Public Prosecutor V K Sharma told special CBI Judge Bharat Parashar.

The judge said, "IO (Investigating officer) states that he has brought both the case diary and crime files in a sealed cover. He is further being told to assist the court in looking into the relevant papers. The matter is now adjourned for consideration on December 12."

During the brief hearing, the court said if there is still any clarification to be sought in the matter, it will ask the agency and then pass order on the closure report.

The court was hearing a case in which an FIR was lodged against industrialist Kumar Mangalam Birla, ex-Coal Secretary P C Parakh and others relating to allocation of Talabira II and III coal blocks in Odisha in 2005 to Hindalco. CBI had later on filed closure report in the case.

Source: News in Hindi And Newspaper

Read More

Lok Sabha passes bill to amend CBI chief's selection process

Minister of State for Personnel Jitendra Singh, while moving the Delhi Special Police Establishment (Amendment) Bill, 2014, for consideration, insisted that there was "no ulterior motive" and the amendment was aimed only to "smoothen" the process of selecting the CBI Director.

The bill provides for inclusion of leader of the single largest opposition party in the three-member committee that selects the CBI Director since there is no recognised Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha. The Committee has Prime Minister and Chief Justice of India as other members.

The amendment bill also provides that "No appointment of a Director shall be invalid merely by reason of any vacancy or absence of a member in the committee." The bill was passed by voice vote but not before a division of votes on its consideration as well as an amendment moved by BJD member Tathagat Satpathy, which was rejected.
  
Leader of Congress Mallikarjun Kharge made a strong plea to the government to withdraw the measure even at this late stage and bring forward a comprehensive amendment. He was supported by BJD members Tathagat Satpathy and Bhartruhari Mahtab. He alleged that the amendments have been brought by the government deliberately in order to "humiliate" the opposition.

"The bill has been brought exclusively to keep out the single largest opposition party," Kharge said, adding that since the Prime Minister and Chief Justice of India are the only other two members, it is believed that the vacancy will arise only of the opposition leader and they can go ahead with the appointment.
 
"If that is the intention, that is not good. Purposely it has been done...We are ready to be beheaded, but we will not bend (Sar kat jayega, per zukanewale nahi). Our opposition is valid. It poses a big danger. It is a double edged sword," he said.

His contention was countered by Parliamentary Affairs Minister M Venkaiah Naidu who remarked that no one was going to be beheaded. It is the job of the people whether or not to strengthen the opposition. We have brought forward the amendments taking into consideration the spirit of democracy," he said.

In lighter comments, he said that there was no question of Kharge being absent as he is in Parliament before it assembles for the day and leaves only after it is adjourned for the day.

Source: News in Hindi And Newspaper

Read More