Rajanna seeks action on 'honeytrap' attempt, submits representation to K'taka Home Minister
Bengaluru, Mar 25 (PTI): Karnataka Home Minister G Parameshwara on Tuesday said the state government will decide on the course of action and nature of the probe into the alleged "honeytrap" attempt on Cooperation Minister K N Rajanna, after consulting legal experts and Chief Minister Siddaramaiah.
The statement came after Rajanna submitted a representation to Parameshwara seeking necessary action regarding the alleged incident.
Addressing reporters here, Parameshwara said, "Rajanna was unable to give any representation or complaint for the last few days due to his work commitments. Today he has given it to me as he had said in the Assembly, I have accepted. Regarding further action and nature of the probe, we will decide after discussing with the Chief Minister."
Noting that he cannot receive the complaint, as it should be given at the police station, he said what Rajanna has submitted to him can be considered as a representation or a plea, and based on this what action can be taken in accordance with law, will be decided after consulting the legal experts.
He declined to disclose the details when asked about the contents of the representation.
Responding to a query on Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed in the Supreme Court on the matter, the Home Minister said, "We don't know what the court decides. We won't wait for it and we will proceed independently for now."
Asked why the police did not file a suo moto case in this matter, he clarified that since the issue was raised in the Assembly, there should have been directions from the Speaker to take action.
"As there was no such cause of action, we had to wait for Rajanna to file representation or complaint."
He, however, refrained from responding to a question if there was a delay in action as the ruling party leaders were allegedly behind the "honey trapping".
Last Thursday, Rajanna had informed the Assembly that honeytrap attempts were made on him and that at least 48 politicians across parties had fallen victim to such schemes.
The issue created a stir in the Assembly, prompting the Home Minister to announce a high-level probe, while the opposition demanded a judicial inquiry by a sitting High Court judge.
Asked whether the representation was only in connection with his case or including 48 politicians across parties, who have fallen victim, Rajanna said his representation was only in connection with the case involving him.
"Is this the first time such a thing has happened? You (media) know better how many have obtained a stay from the court in such cases. My intention is to put an end to such things and not take revenge or make allegations against someone."
Asked why he was giving a representation to the Home Minister instead of lodging a complaint with the police, Rajanna said his move is consequential to the developments in the Assembly, after his name was taken there in connection with the "honey trap" case.
Earlier in the day, Rajanna told media in Tumakuru that he also wanted strict action against those involved in or supporting such acts of "honey trapping", as he stated that he has detailed everything that happened in a three-page note.
"I have not installed CCTV cameras in my Bengaluru house. If they were there, we could have identified those who came," he said.
He noted that the individuals who allegedly attempted to "honeytrap" him were strangers, and it needed to be investigated whether they acted independently or had someone behind them.
Giving further details, he said among the people who had visited him twice in alleged 'honeytrap' attempts, the same man was present on both occasions, while the woman accompanying him was different each time.
"The woman who came the second time claimed to be a High Court lawyer. However, she was not wearing a lawyer's coat but was clad in jeans and a blue top. They approached me, stating that they had something important and confidential to discuss. I can recognise them if I see their photos," Rajanna said.
Reacting to a PIL filed in Apex Court on this issue, Rajanna said, the PIL seeks a CBI probe, claiming that he had referred to 'honey trapping' of judges, but the fact is that he has not spoken about judges.
To a question on his travel plans, Rajanna said he would be visiting Delhi after March 30.
Asked whether he would take up the matter with the Congress high command, he responded, "The matter has already reached the high command. They have not asked me anything personally, so I haven’t spoken to them. However, they have gathered information on their own and have spoken to the Chief Minister about it."
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.
Unemployed 'youngsters like cockroaches' become media, activists; attack system: CJI
New Delhi (PTI): Likening some unemployed youngsters to cockroaches, Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant on Friday said they go on to "become" media, social media and RTI activists and start attacking the system.
The comments came while a bench of CJI Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi was pulling up a lawyer for "pursuing" a senior advocate designation. It said there were already "parasites" in society who attack the system and asked the petitioner whether he wanted to join hands with them.
"The entire world may be eligible to become senior (advocate), but at least you are not entitled," the bench told the petitioner lawyer.
A visibly anguished CJI observed that if the Delhi High Court would confer senior advocate designation upon the petitioner, the apex court would set that aside seeing his professional conduct.
The CJI also referred to the kind of language used by the petitioner on Facebook.
"There are already parasites of society who attack the system and you want to join hands with them?" he said.
"There are youngsters like cockroaches, who don't get any employment or have any place in profession. Some of them become media, some of them become social media, RTI activists and other activists and they start attacking everyone," he said.
The bench also asked the petitioner whether he did not have any other litigation.
"Is this the conduct of a person who seeks to be designated as a senior advocate?" the bench asked.
It said senior advocate designation is something that is conferred on a person and is not to be pursued.
"You are pursuing it. Does it look proper?" the top court said, asking whether a senior advocate designation was a status symbol to be kept ornamentally.
It also observed that it wanted to ask the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to verify the degrees of many of those who were wearing black robes as there were serious doubts over the genuineness of their degrees.
It said the Bar Council of India would never do anything on this issue as they "need their votes".
The petitioner apologised to the bench and sought permission to withdraw the petition. The bench allowed the withdrawal of the petition.
