Sohrabuddin case: Rahul targets Amit Shah, Smriti Irani hits back
New Delhi, Nov 22: Congress president Rahul Gandhi Thursday attacked BJP chief Amit Shah over a key CBI investigator's testimony in a Mumbai court on a alleged fake encounters case, following which Union Minister Smriti Irani accused him of being a "lie machine".
Gandhi used a news report quoting the chief CBI investigator into the "fake encounters" of Sohrabuddin Shaikh and Tulsiram Prajapati alleging that Shah was a "key conspirator" in the case.
He also took a swipe at the BJP, saying it is "completely appropriate" for the party to have such a person as its chief, who has been called a "key conspirator" in an investigative officer's testimony in court.
"The Gita says you can never escape the truth and so it has always been. Sandeep Tamgadge has called Amit Shah a 'key conspirator' in his testimony. It's completely appropriate for the BJP to have such a man as its President," he said on Twitter.
Irani hit back saying, "JhoothKiMachine" Rahul Gandhi is back in action. He knows that after following due process, court discharged Mr Shah in 2014. Court had also held that Amit bhai was implicated by CBI for political reasons."
"Will Rahul answer who in the UPA ordered this political witch-hunt," she asked.
"Does National Herald Loot 'Bail Dharak' Rahul Gandhi not remember that he had dispatched Sibal to challenge Amitbhai's discharge and petition was summarily dismissed," she asked in a tweet.
Irani also hit out at Gandhi's Gita barb, saying, "Am convinced - had Mr Gandhi opened the Gita even once in his life, he wouldn't be indulging in such brazen lies."
Chief investigation officer (CIO) Sandeep Tamgadge deposed in a CBI court that BJP chief Amit Shah and three IPS officers were the main conspirators behind the alleged fake encounters of Sohrabuddin Shaikh and Tulsiram Prajapati.
He, however, conceded that that his claim was not supported by any documentary evidence in the charge sheet filed by him.
"From the investigation done by us, we found the principal conspirators were Amit Shah, D G Vanzara (former Deputy Inspector-General Gujarat Police), Rajkumar Pandian (SP, Intelligence Bureau) and M N Dinesh (IPS officer, Rajasthan Police)," Tamgade said.
All four have been discharged by the trial court in the case.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Single higher education regulator bill tabled in LS; Oppn flags ‘centralisation,' JPC likely
New Delhi: A bill to set up a 13-member body to regulate institutions of higher education was introduced in the Lok Sabha on Monday.
Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan introduced the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, which seeks to establish an overarching higher education commission along with three councils for regulation, accreditation, and ensuring academic standards for universities and higher education institutions in India.
Meanwhile, the move drew strong opposition, with members warning that it could weaken institutional autonomy and result in excessive centralisation of higher education in India.
The Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, 2025, earlier known as the Higher Education Council of India (HECI) Bill, has been introduced in line with the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.
The proposed legislation seeks to merge three existing regulatory bodies, the University Grants Commission (UGC), the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), and the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), into a single unified body called the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan.
At present, the UGC regulates non-technical higher education institutions, the AICTE oversees technical education, and the NCTE governs teacher education in India.
Under the proposed framework, the new commission will function through three separate councils responsible for regulation, accreditation, and the maintenance of academic standards across universities and higher education institutions in the country.
According to the Bill, the present challenges faced by higher educational institutions due to the multiplicity of regulators having non-harmonised regulatory approval protocols will be done away with.
The higher education commission, which will be headed by a chairperson appointed by the President of India, will cover all central universities and colleges under it, institutes of national importance functioning under the administrative purview of the Ministry of Education, including IITs, NITs, IISc, IISERs, IIMs, and IIITs.
At present, IITs and IIMs are not regulated by the University Grants Commission (UGC).
Government to refer bill to JPC; Oppn slams it
The government has expressed its willingness to refer it to a joint committee after several members of the Lok Sabha expressed strong opposition to the Bill, stating that they were not given time to study its provisions.
Responding to the opposition, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju said the government intends to refer the Bill to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) for detailed examination.
Congress Lok Sabha MP Manish Tewari warned that the Bill could result in “excessive centralisation” of higher education. He argued that the proposed law violates the constitutional division of legislative powers between the Union and the states.
According to him, the Bill goes beyond setting academic standards and intrudes into areas such as administration, affiliation, and the establishment and closure of university campuses. These matters, he said, fall under Entry 25 of the Concurrent List and Entry 32 of the State List, which cover the incorporation and regulation of state universities.
Tewari further stated that the Bill suffers from “excessive delegation of legislative power” to the proposed commission. He pointed out that crucial aspects such as accreditation frameworks, degree-granting powers, penalties, institutional autonomy, and even the supersession of institutions are left to be decided through rules, regulations, and executive directions. He argued that this amounts to a violation of established constitutional principles governing delegated legislation.
Under the Bill, the regulatory council will have the power to impose heavy penalties on higher education institutions for violating provisions of the Act or related rules. Penalties range from ₹10 lakh to ₹75 lakh for repeated violations, while establishing an institution without approval from the commission or the state government could attract a fine of up to ₹2 crore.
Concerns were also raised by members from southern states over the Hindi nomenclature of the Bill. N.K. Premachandran, an MP from the Revolutionary Socialist Party representing Kollam in Kerala, said even the name of the Bill was difficult to pronounce.
He pointed out that under Article 348 of the Constitution, the text of any Bill introduced in Parliament must be in English unless Parliament decides otherwise.
DMK MP T.M. Selvaganapathy also criticised the government for naming laws and schemes only in Hindi. He said the Constitution clearly mandates that the nomenclature of a Bill should be in English so that citizens across the country can understand its intent.
Congress MP S. Jothimani from Tamil Nadu’s Karur constituency described the Bill as another attempt to impose Hindi and termed it “an attack on federalism.”
_vb_22.jpeg)
