Already neck-deep in trouble over his alleged involvement in the 2G scam, Home Minister P Chidambaram is at the centre of a new controversy. He may find it difficult to wriggle out of he crisis. Documents available with The Pioneer show that with the specific approval of C h i d amb a r am, t h e ome Ministry directed the withdrawal of three FIRs against one of his former clients who was accused of heating and forgery. This conflict of interest relates to a politically sensitive case in which hidambaram's client SP Gupta, a hotelier, was also accused of misusing the names of the late Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi and C on g r e s s p r e s i d e nt S on i a Gandhi. He floated a charitable trust amed after Rajiv Gandhi with Sonia as its chief patron and forged letterheads of seve r a l MPs . The ain c a s e against Gupta was defrauding VLS Finance to the tune of several crores of rupees. . The ome inistry decided to give direction on May 9, 2011 to quash the FIRs upon the petition filed by Gupta to the ome Secretary. Before issuing direction to the Delhi Police, the Home Ministry consulted the Law inistry or legal opinion to provide escape route to Gupta. However, without giving its own verdict on the atter, he Law Ministry passed the onus on the Home Ministry by stating, “The power under Section 321 of the rPC vested in Government can be exercised in such cases in the interest of proper administration of ustice and the paramount consideration in such cases is the administration of justice.” This was enough xcuse for the Home Ministry to issue direction to withdraw the FIRs even though the Ministry on We d n y a dmi t t e d t h at Chidambaram had himself noted on the file on May 4, 2011 that the Ministry hould only convey the Law Ministry’s opinion to the police. “When the file was submitted to the Home inister, he noted on May 4, 2011 that MHA should not give any direction and MHA may only c onv e y t Ministry of Law,” CNN-IBN TV c h a n n e l q u o t e d Hom e Ministry’s joint secretary M Gopal Reddy s saying. Reddy was responding to questionnaire sent by the TV channel to Chidambaram to clarify his osition and explain the apparent conflict of interest. Interestingly, Reddy said Chidambaram was not ure f at all he represented Gupta. “The Home Minister is unable to recall at this distance of time whether he ppeared in a case concerning M/s Sunair Hotels Pvt Ltd at any time between 1999 and 2003,” Reddy aid. Interestingly, the Home Ministry acted on Gupta's petition even when the Delhi Police had carried a etailed investigation and field a chargesheet against him. Legal experts feel that the withdrawal of FIR after filing of chargesheet is rare in such cases of fraud. Continued on The revelation is damaging for Chidambaram on two counts. First, he will find it difficult to explain why such a favour was granted in ase involving an old client. Second, the episode in not likely to please the Congress leadership especially hen the man granted such a special favour had misused the names of the Gandhi family. In its status eport to the Home Ministry, the Delhi Police had said the c h a r g e s h e e t s / s u p p l e m e n t a r y chargesheets had already been filed in the courts and the cases were at various stages. Chidambaram s n advocate represented businessman SP Gupta and argued for quashing one of the FIRs before the Delhi igh Court in 2003 and Company Law Board (CLB) in 2001. The FIRs against Chidambaram’s client Gupta as filed on the complaint by VLS Finance on judicial interventions. But when Chidambaram became Home Minister this case took an interesting turn. The Home Ministry on May 9, 2011 directed the elhi Police and the Delhi Government to withdraw FIRs against Gupta. Gupta’s representations to the Home Secretary alleged the FIRs against him were “based on the improper investigations by the Delhi Police” under the influence of his rival VLS Finance. “The matter has been considered in detail carefully n MHA (Ministry of Home Affairs). As per advice tendered by the Department of Legal Affair, Ministry of aw and Justice keeping in view the facts of these cases, the Home Department of Government of NCT of elhi should urgently scrutinise the above cited case FIR No 90/2000, FIR No 99/2002 and FIR No 48/2002 egistered by the Delhi Police for taking action under Section 321 of the CrPC for withdrawal of rosecution immediately. This has approval of the Union Home M ini s t e r,” di re c t e d MHA Director K Saxena to Arvind Ray, Principal Secretary (Home) in the Delhi Government.
No comments:
Post a Comment