Centre 'mortgaged' foreign policy to US, says Minister Priyank Kharge
Kalaburagi (Karnataka) (PTI): Karnataka minister Priyank Kharge on Saturday flayed the foreign policy of the union government, alleging that India’s global standing was being "compromised" and the Centre had "failed" to respond firmly to remarks by senior US officials on India’s economic and energy policies.
Addressing a press conference in Kalaburagi, Kharge also questioned the "silence" of BJP leaders over the issue and accused them of "focusing on attacking opposition leaders" rather than defending the country’s dignity.
“The Central Government should have at least a little shame. They have practically mortgaged our entire foreign policy to the United States. Today our dignity is being valued at almost nothing,” Kharge, who is son of Congress president Mallikarjun Kharge, said.
ALSO READ: Explosion heard over Dubai airport followed by cloud of smoke
Referring to remarks reportedly made by US Deputy Secretary Christopher Landau in Delhi, the minister said the comments indicated how foreign governments were openly discussing India’s economic trajectory.
“Yesterday you might have seen — a US Deputy Secretary said in Delhi, not in America but in Delhi, that they (US) will not repeat in India the mistake they made with China, 'we will not allow India to grow',” he said.
Kharge cited comments by US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent regarding crude oil imports from Russia amid the ongoing war.
“Yesterday, the US Secretary of the Treasury said because of the war they (US) have given India a 30-day permission to purchase crude oil from Russia.’ Permission!” he said, questioning why the Union government had not strongly responded to such statements.
The minister also questioned the Centre over energy policy and fuel supplies, saying there were conflicting claims on India’s oil reserves.
He also criticised the silence of Union ministers, including Petroleum Minister Hardeep Singh Puri.
“In Parliament they said we have reserves for 75 days. But oil companies say in press conferences that we have only 25 days. How is that?” he asked.
Targeting BJP leaders from Karnataka, including Union minister Pralhad Joshi, Kharge alleged they were quick to comment on the state government but avoided speaking on issues affecting national dignity.
He also slammed Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s foreign policy approach, comparing it with earlier Congress governments.
Recalling an instance involving former US secretary of state Hillary Clinton, he said, "She once said she was trying to determine whether India could buy oil from Iran. The then Prime Minister Manmohan Singh clearly told her: ‘That decision is within my jurisdiction, not yours. I will decide, not you."
He added that former Prime Minister Indira Gandhi had similarly asserted India’s independent foreign policy in her dealings with then US President Richard Nixon.
Kharge also accused the BJP and RSS of practising what he described as "selective nationalism", and issuing “patriotism certificates” to others while remaining silent on issues concerning India’s global standing.
He further said the public debate should focus on pressing economic and diplomatic issues rather than personal attacks on opposition leaders such as Rahul Gandhi, Sonia Gandhi and Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah.
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.
Court can reject anticipatory bail but cannot direct accused to surrender: SC
New Delhi (PTI): A court can reject anticipatory bail of an accused but it has no jurisdiction to direct him to surrender before the trial court, the Supreme Court has said.
A bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and Ujjal Bhuyan made the observation while hearing a plea filed by a man accused of cheating and forgery.
"If the court wants to reject the anticipatory bail, it may do so, but the court has no jurisdiction to say that the petitioner should now surrender," the bench said.
The Jharkhand High Court had rejected anticipatory bail plea of the accused and asked him to surrender and seek regular bail.
In this case, a complaint had been filed before a magistrate alleging offences under Sections 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 420 (cheating), 467 (forgery of valuable security), 468 (forgery for purpose of cheating), 471 (using forged document) and 120B read with 34 of the IPC, in connection with a land dispute.
The high court had dismissed the second anticipatory bail application of the accused on the ground that no new circumstances were shown.
It had relied on its earlier order rejecting his first anticipatory bail plea, in which the court directed the petitioner to surrender before the trial court and seek regular bail in terms of the decision in Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI.
The top court said such a direction was wholly without jurisdiction and said that if a court chooses to reject anticipatory bail, it may do so, but it cannot compel the accused to surrender.
