JD(S) leader Kumaraswamy behind circulation of explicit videos, alleges Deputy CM Shivakumar
Chikkamgaluru (Karnataka) (PTI): Karnataka Deputy Chief Minister D K Shivakumar on Wednesday charged JD(S) leader H D Kumaraswamy with being behind the circulation of explicit videos allegedly linked to Hassan MP Prajwal Revanna, and called him "king of blackmailing" and the "lead,director, and producer of the story."
Shivakumar, also the state Congress President, was reacting to Kumaraswamy demanding his dismissal from the Cabinet, dubbing him a "key conspirator" in the circulation of alleged sex videos.
The 33-year-old JD(S) MP, who is Kumaraswamy's nephew, is facing sexual abuse charges. The scandal has raised a political storm with the ruling Congress and BJP-JD(S) engaged in a slugfest.
While the Congress government has formed a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe the cases, the BJP and JD(S) -- NDA partners -- have demanded that it be handed over to the CBI.
"Kumaraswamy knows about the pen-drive (containing explicit video clips) matter completely. A lawyer (Devaraje Gowda) and others are speaking. Kumaranna (Kumaraswamy) wants my resignation, it seems there is competition for Vokkaliga leadership. Let me give resignation, as he wants it," Shivakumar said sarcastically.
While speaking to reporters here, he said, "Finishing (politically) one after the other is his (Kumaraswamy) job. Blackmailing, (Kumaraswamy is) king of blackmail...he is threatening everyone, officers, politicians, what else he has for doing? Let him do it, there is time to discuss all this, let's discuss in the Assembly."
Kumaraswamy on Tuesday had claimed that 25,000 pen drives with videos of women being sexually abused allegedly by his nephew, Lok Sabha election candidate Prajwal Revanna, were distributed before polls, and accused Chief Minister Siddaramaiah and Shivakumar of a conspiracy.
The former CM also had sought to discredit the Special Investigation Team (SIT) formed by the Congress government on April 28 to probe the charges against Prajwal of sexually abusing several women after videos allegedly involving him started making the rounds on social media.
Kumaraswamy said his name and that of his father H D Deve Gowda should not be taken or linked to the explicit video clips case, as the Revanna family is seperate, Shivakumar pointed out and asked, "then why is he (Kumaraswamy) worried about the matter that is not linked to him? Having already said that action should be taken in accordance with law and the guilty should be punished, why is he speaking?"
"Is he (Kumaraswamy) a lawyer or a judge to issue the judgment? Let him go to court and argue point by point. He has called SIT -- Shivakumar Investigation team and Siddaramaiah Investigation Team, (Congress in-charge of Karnataka Randeep Singh) Surjewala Investigation Team. He is the lead of the story, he is the director, he is the producer, he is everything. We know what he is up to," he said.
Asked about allegations that Congress was behind the pen-drive circulation, Shivakumar said, "Kumaraswamy is getting things done by the BJP, he is behind everything, let the investigation happen."
"Let those speaking on the issue, if they have any shame, go to the victims' family and try to instill confidence and give them strength," he said.
Reacting to JD(S) staging a protest against him, Shivakumar said, they "can't sleep" without taking his name
"If they don't do it against me, their market won't run, without taking my name they won't get peace of mind, and even you (media) won't show them. More strong more enemies, less strong less enemies, not strong no enemies," he added.
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)
