SIT probe in sexual abuse case involving MP Prajwal 'losing track': JD(S) to petition Governor
Bengaluru (PTI): JD(S) leader H D Kumaraswamy on Thursday alleged that the Special Investigation Team (SIT) probing into the sexual abuse charges against his nephew, Hassan MP Prajwal Revanna, is "losing track", and said his party would submit a memorandum to Karnataka Governor Thaawarchand Gehlot.
The former chief minister, while maintaining that he wants the guilty to be punished in accordance with the law, raised questions on the progress of the probe by the SIT constituted by the Karnataka's Congress government.
Also raising questions regarding the investigation against Prajwal's father and his brother, MLA H D Revanna, who is facing kidnapping charges, Kumaraswamy asked why the woman who was allegedly kidnapped has not been produced before the court so far, after she was rescued.
"We are giving a memorandum to the Governor as to how the investigation is losing its track... I have been saying since day one that whoever has committed wrong has to be punished. Looking at the way in which things are going on, it looks like none of these people want the guilty punished, but want publicity... What is the achievement (progress) since the investigation began?" Kumaraswamy said.
While speaking to reporters here, he said there is information that the family of the kidnapped woman has been kept here. He questioned why the woman has not been produced before the court till now.
"It has been how many days since the kidnapped woman was brought here? Has her statement been recorded under section 164 of CrPC (statements recorded by magistrate)? Has she been produced before the judge? It has been five days, why has the woman not been produced before the judge? From where was she brought? Was the 'mahazar' done? Was she brought from some farmhouse as claimed and reported in the media?," Kumaraswamy asked.
Further questioning why the SIT has not shared this information so far, the JD(S) leader said it has been five days since the woman was brought here, and they have not said anything on whether Revanna was responsible for the abduction or not.
"Why is the truth not placed before the court? They have sought time till Monday to file their objection. It means they want to keep Revanna in jail for three more days. They (Congress leaders) want to fulfill their hate, that is what they want. They don't want punishment for the guilty," he added. "I don't know whether the issue will die down after June 4 (Lok Sabha polls results)."
Revanna was remanded into judicial custody till May 14 by a magisterial court here on Wednesday.
He was in the custody of the SIT after being arrested in the alleged case of kidnapping a woman.
The case was filed based on a complaint by her son, who also accused the MLA's son Prajwal Revanna of having sexually assaulted her.
According to the police, the abducted woman was subsequently rescued.
The 33-year-old Prajwal Revanna is facing charges of sexually abusing several women. The scandal has raised a political storm with the ruling Congress and the BJP-JD(S) engaged in a slugfest.
Responding to a question on Deputy Chief Minister D K Shivakumar allegedly targeting him, Kumaraswamy sarcastically said, "Yes I'm the producer, director and also I'm the lead of the story... Shivakumar wants me to be the lead of the story right? I'm happy that he has accepted me as the lead of the story."
Shivakumar on Wednesday charged Kumaraswamy with being behind the circulation of videos of the sexual abuse of several women allegedly by Prajwal Revanna, and called the JDS second-in-command the "king of blackmailing" and the "lead, director, and producer of the story."
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)
