Guj cops for HRD ministry reply on complaint against Setalvad
New Delhi: A complaint has been lodged with the Gujarat police charging Teesta Setalvad and her NGO Sabrang Trust with trying to "mix religion with politics" and spreading disharmony through the curricular material prepared for the erstwhile UPA government which had given it a grant of about Rs 1.4 crore.
The complaint, lodged with the Ahmedabad city police by Rais Khan Pathan, a former close aide of Setalvad, also took into account the report of a panel of the Ministry of Human Resource Development which in its finding has claimed that a prima facie case existed against her under section 153A and 153B of IPC for promoting enmity on grounds of religion and imputations, assertions prejudicial to national integration.
Sources said the crime branch of Ahmedabad police has sent a communication to the deputy secretary, department of school education and literacy of the Union HRD Ministry, urging it to "furnish point-wise reply on the application/ complaint at the earliest".
They said the ministry is yet to submit its response to the communication sent in November last.
The HRD Ministry in 2016 had sought the opinion of the top law officer endorsing the report of its three-member committee, saying "the report of the inquiry committee is exhaustive and deals with every aspect of the matter and that action as suggested in the said report may be undertaken in terms of fixing liabilities/lapses, action for inciting disharmony and hatred and also for recovery of the money as is stipulated in the scheme itself".
Pathan had filed the complaint in November last year with the crime branch of the Ahmedabad police on the basis of the report against Setalvad, her husband Javed Anand, officials of the Sabrang Trust and unknown officials of the HRD Ministry.
He sought investigation and prosecution for the alleged offence of criminal conspiracy, criminal misappropriation of property, criminal breach of trust by public servants, promoting enmity between different groups on the ground of religion, among others.
Pathan has alleged that a large amount from the HRD funding was used during 2008 to 2014 on 'Khoj' project of the Sabrang Trust under the scheme of 'National Policy on Education' in Maharashtra and Gujarat as well as on the 'Peace Building and conflict resolution' project.
The project was launched by Setalvad's NGO in some districts of Maharashtra and Gujarat.
The HRD panel claimed to have gone through "a sizeable portion" of written materials prepared by Setalvad for the trust and 'Khoj' for teachers and the students of class V and VI, with the complaint alleging it contained "explosive literature" which reflected "hatred" and "venom", thereby falling under sections 153A and 153B of the IPC.
Pathan in his complaint has claimed that the three-member panel, comprising Supreme Court lawyer Abhijit Bhattacharjee, Gujarat Central University Vice Chancellor S A Bari and Ministry official Gaya Prasad, had confirmed that the then officials of HRD Ministry in connivance with trustees of Sabrang Trust illegally sanctioned the funds under the 'Sarva Shiksha Abhiyaan'.
"Large amounts were also transferred as donation from Sabrang trust to Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP), another NGO of Teesta Setalvad which too was used for various activities such as payment of salary to office staff in Gujarat, travelling expenses to riot victims of Gujarat, advocate fees and on various campaigns launched in Gujarat against the state government," Pathan's complaint alleged.
The HRD panel, which had questioned the grant of money to the tune of Rs 2.05 crore, out of which Rs 1.39 crore was released as the trust was unable to utilise 50 per cent of the amount, said one of the reasons for its ineligibility was that the documents of the trust suggested "brazen contempt of Supreme Court by Setalvad in her writing".
The report had said the committee was of the view that there was "a hiatus between the theory and practice" of the trust as it was simply "whipping up identity politics" claiming it was not conducive to the avowed purpose for which the trust had said in its application form.
It alleged that the public money given under the scheme of 'Sarv Shiksha Abhiyan' to the trust/'Khoj' was "clearly found to be spreading disharmony, feeling of enmity, hatred and ill will etc".
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.
Karnataka Assembly passes bill on Palace Grounds amid opposition protest
Bengaluru, Mar 6 (PTI): The Karnataka Assembly on Thursday passed the Bangalore Palace (Utilisation and Regulation of Land) Bill, reaffirming state ownership over 472 acres and 16 guntas of land here, amid protests by the opposition BJP.
During the discussion, Karnataka Law and Parliamentary Affairs Minister H K Patil said the state government would have to provide Rs 200 crore worth of Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) for each acre of land, which means that for 15 acres, Rs 3,000 crore worth of TDR would be issued.
“If we accept it, then this 2-km stretch of road will become the costliest road in the world. If we accept it then how are we going to develop the city in later stages? How will you carry out development works?” asked Patil.
He also pointed out that this question was raised not only under the Congress government but also during the previous BJP regime.
However, the BJP-led cabinet has opposed the project.
ALSO READ: Budget session: Law Min. HK Patil introduces Microfinance bill in Karnataka assembly
“Suppose we agree to it then, what will be the valuation of the 472 acres? It will be lakhs and lakhs of crores of rupees. Can we accept?” Patil wondered.
The Minister said the government had previously exercised its executive powers to issue an ordinance, which was approved by the Governor. Now the government is bringing a bill with two amendments.
“In this bill, we have made provisions either to develop or drop the road development work,” Patil explained.
However, BJP state president B Y Vijayendra and BJP MLA Arvind Bellad opposed the move, alleging that the government was targetting Yaduveer Krishna Datta Chamaraja Wadiyar, the scion of the Mysuru royal family, and the BJP MP from Mysuru-Kodagu constituency out of political vendetta.
“We talk of 472 acres of Mysuru Maharaja but here there are many Maharajas who too own 400 acres, 500 acres and thousands of acres of land, which is known to everyone,” Bellad said.
He slammed the Congress government, saying political power should not be misused for personal vendetta.
“Why (the then Deputy Chief Minister) Siddaramaiah brought the law in 1996 pertaining to the Bangalore Palace? Why are you setting eyes on the Bangalore Palace?” he asked.
Vijayendra charged that Wadiyar won the election on BJP ticket so the state government realised that it should acquire it.
“This bill has been brought for political vengeance. We are not discussing whether Rs 3,000 crore is exorbitant or not but the moment Yaduveer became MP, the state government woke up. You should be ashamed. This house should not be used for political vendetta,” he said.
Intervening, Minister Priyank Kharge said Vijayendra should not have raised it because the intention behind building the road was noble.
According to him, the BJP too had the same plan when it was in power.
He sought to know whether thousands of crores of rupees be spent on a road which should have cost significantly less.
In response, BJP MLA B A Basavaraj (Byrathi) said issuing TDR will not be a burden on the state government and appealed to the ruling Congress to reconsider its stance.
Minister Ramalinga Reddy too explained that the Karnataka government acquired the entire land way back in 1996.
The Mysuru royal family went to the High Court, which gave ruling in favour of the state government. The royal family then approached the Supreme Court, where the case is still going on, the Minister pointed out.
“The final judgment is pending in the SC to decide whether the acquisition was right or wrong. If the SC says it’s the royal family’s property then let it be so. If the order is in the state government’s favour then we can take a decision. The bill is only about it,” Reddy explained.
Speaker U T Khader then called for a voice vote and the bill was passed by the Assembly amidst opposition BJP’s discontent.
