80

What National Herald case all about

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

The booklet that explains everything that is illegal (and whatever is legal) about National Herald. Dec 19th is the D-day. MSM will never reveal the truth. Share it with everyone including Congressis.

Citation preview

Page 1: What National Herald case all about
Page 2: What National Herald case all about
Page 3: What National Herald case all about

1

The Congress Party, for the past few days, has disrupted both houses of Parliament. Its Goebbelsianpropaganda is that the party’s leadership is a victim ofpolitical vendetta. What then are the facts?

A company was created for the purpose of startinga newspaper ‘National Herald’. The company got allocation of prime land in several parts of the country.The land was meant to be used for the newspaper business. Today, there is no newspaper. There is onlyland and built up structures which are being commercially exploited.

A political party is entitled to collect funds for itspolitical activities. For that purpose, it gets an exemp-tion from payment of income tax. Rupees ninety croresfrom amongst the funds collected by the Congress Partyare given to the newspaper company. Prima facie, it canbe said that there a breach of the provisions of theIncome Tax Act in as much as an exempted income isused for a non-exempt purpose.

The rupees ninety crore debt is then assigned to aSection 25 company for a paltry amount of rupees 50lakhs. Tax exempted money effectively gets transferred toa real estate company. The real estate company now

WHY THE CONGRESS IS WRONG- SHRI ARUN JAITLEY

(MINISTER OF FINANCE, INFORMATION & BROADCASTING AND CORPORATE AFFAIRS)

Page 4: What National Herald case all about

2

acquires 99% of the share-holding of the former newspaper company. Effectively, the Section 25 companysubstantially controlled by the leaders of the CongressParty now owns all the properties acquired for a newspaper publication, and for virtually no consideration,the Section 25 company owns all the assets. This profitwill become huge taxable income in its hands.

Since 2012, as a private citizen, Dr. SubramaniamSwamy, alleges a breach of trust. It is the duty of everycitizen to report an offence when it comes to his notice.Any citizen can set the process of criminal law intomotion. A Trial Court issues summons on Dr. Swamy’scomplaint. The accused leaders of the Congress Partymove the Delhi High Court for quashing, which grantsthem an interim protection. Eventually, the Delhi HighCourt dismisses the petition of the accused. The accusednow have two alternatives. They can either challengethe order in the Supreme Court or appear before thetrial court and contest the case on merits.

The facts are clear. By a series of financial transactions, the leaders of the Congress Party created‘Chakravyuh’ for themselves. They have to find theirown exit route out of the ‘Chakravyuh’. They haveacquired properties worth a huge amount withoutspending anything. They have used tax exemptedincome for a non-exempted purpose. They have transferred the income of a political party to a realestate company. They have created huge taxable incomein favour of the real estate company. The Government,

Page 5: What National Herald case all about

3

so far, has not taken any punitive action. TheEnforcement Directorate has not issued any notice tothem. The Income Tax authorities will follow their ownprocedure. The Criminal Court, meanwhile, has takencognizance of the offence. The High Court has agreedwith the Trial Court. The battle has to be fought legally.But the results of legal battles are always uncertain. TheCongress is, therefore, crying foul and calling it politicalvendetta. Is that a charge against the Courts? TheGovernment has passed no order in relation to the disputed transactions. There is equality before the law.No one is above the law. India has never accepted thedictat that the queen is not answerable to the law. Whyshould the Congress Party and its leaders not contestthe notice before the Court? The Government cannothelp them in the matter, nor can the Parliament. Whythen disturb the Parliament and prevent the legislativeactivity from continuing? The answer to the CongressParty’s leadership landing up in a ‘Chakravyuh’ is to fighttheir battle legally and not disrupt Parliament. By disrupting democracy the financial web created by theCongress leaders cannot be undone.

Page 6: What National Herald case all about

4

The Congress has behaved in a most irresponsible manner by disrupting Parliament's proceedings over the National Herald case. Theissue has nothing to do with either the two Housesor the Government. Based on a petition by a privatecitizen, Mr Subramanian Swamy, a trial court inDelhi had summoned Congress president SoniaGandhi, vice president Rahul Gandhi and a fewother senior party leaders before it as accused. Theaccused approached the Delhi High Court seekingquashing of the summons but the court declinedtheir plea. Now they have to appear on December19 unless they get legal relief meanwhile. TheCongress has claimed that the case is one of "political vendetta" and "proxy litigation" by theBharatiya Janata Party against its senior leaders.Now, it's true that Mr Swamy is a member of theBJP, but there is nothing to suggest that he has beenacting on behalf of either the party or theGovernment. In fact, he has been pursuing the

IRRESPONSIBLE CONGRESSMisusing National Herald case to disrupt House

Editorial| 10 December 2015

Page 7: What National Herald case all about

5

National Herald case for a long while now, and it hadbeen on his radar even before the BJP-ledGovernment assumed power. Moreover, he hasenjoyed the reputation of being a lone-wolf maverick. On their part, senior Ministers in theNarendra Modi Government have made it clear thatthe regime has got nothing to do with the case,although they admit that the issues Mr Swamy hasraised and based on which the senior leaders of theCongress have been made the accused, are seriousenough to merit attention. But even here we don'thave any arm of the Government investigating thematter as of now. Where then is the question ofpolitical vendetta when a court finds it appropriateto proceed with the matter? Surely, neither the trialcourt nor the High Court can be accused of beingpoliticaly motivated, the first in issuing the sum-mons and the second in upholding it. The Congressneeds to understand that the matter has to befought legally and not politically - and certainly notby blocking the functioning of Parliament at a timewhen crucial Bills of national import are pendingapproval. In any case, all that the court has done isto ask Ms Sonia Gandhi, Mr Rahul Gandhi and others to appear before it. Congress leaders can continue to take umbrage over this only

Page 8: What National Herald case all about

6

at the risk of projecting themselves as people abovethe law of the land.

In the meantime, instead of raving and rantingagainst the Modi regime, the Congress shouldrespond to the pointed legal questions thrown up.Since the matter has been in the public domain forlong, the key details are known to all those whohave been even casually following it. They need no repetition at length. However, it is important to bearin mind that the Delhi High Court, while dismissingthe Congress leaders' plea for quashing the trailcourt's summons, said the issue "smacks of criminality". The court also said that "questionableconduct of the petitioners needs to be properlyexamined… to find out the truth". These are seriousobservations by the court, and the Congress cannothope to effectively brush aside through a display ofpolitical brazenness. It is fine for Ms Gandhi toindulge in rhetoric - "I'm Indira Gandhi's daughter-in-law. I'm not afraid" - to fire up her supporters, butit does little to address the grave charges that sheand others face.

Page 9: What National Herald case all about

7

∞‚ ‚◊ÿ ¡’ Œ‡Ê Ã¡Ë ‚ •ÊÁÕ¸∑§ ∑§Œ◊ ©ΔÊ∑§⁄U ∞∑§ Œ‡Ê∑§ ∑‘§¬ÃŸ ∑‘§ ’ÊŒ ÁflE Á’⁄UÊŒ⁄UË ◊¥ •¬ŸÊ flÊÁ¡’ SÕÊŸ ª˝„áÊ ∑§⁄U ⁄U„Ê „Ò, ÷Ê¡¬Ê∑‘§ ŸÃÎàfl flÊ‹Ë ∞Ÿ«Ë∞ ‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄U ∑‘§ ⁄UÊ¡ŸËÁÃ∑§ Áfl⁄UÙÁœÿÙ¥ Ÿ Œ‡Ê fl ŒÈÁŸÿÊ ◊¥©‚ ’ŒŸÊ◊ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§Ê •Á÷ÿÊŸ ¿«∏ ⁄UπÊ „Ò– ¡ÊÁ„⁄U „Ò ßã„¥ ‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄U ∑§ËŸËÁÃÿÙ¥ fl ∑§Êÿ¸R§◊Ù¥ ∑‘§ Á‹∞ ¡ŸÃÊ ◊¥ ’…∏ÃË ‚⁄UÊ„ŸÊ „¡◊ Ÿ„Ë¥ „Ù ⁄U„Ë „Ò–’„È◊à „ÊÁ‚‹ ∑§⁄U ‚ûÊÊ ◊¥ •Ê߸ ‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄U ∑‘§ Áπ‹Ê»§ ÿ„ ’…∏ÃË •‚Á„cáÊÈÈÃÊÁ‚∑§È«∏ÃË ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ •ı⁄U ÷˝Á◊à flÊ◊Œ‹Ù¥ ∑§Ë •‚È⁄UˇÊÊ ª˝¥ÕË ‚ ÁŸ∑§‹Ë „Ò– ¡„Ê¥ ŒÈÁŸÿÊ ∑§Ë ‡ÊÁQ§ÿÊ¥ Ÿ⁄U¥Œ˝ ◊ÙŒË ∑‘§ ŸÃÎàfl ◊¥ ÷Ê⁄Uà ∑‘§ ©Œÿ ∑§Ù SflË∑§Ê⁄U⁄U„Ë „Ò¥ fl„Ë¥, ÷Ê¡¬Ê ∑‘§ Áfl⁄UÙœË ⁄UÊC˝Ëÿ ⁄UÊ¡ŸËÁÃ∑§ Áfl◊‡Ê¸ ∑§Ù ÁflŸÊ‡Ê∑§Ê⁄UË ¬Õ¬⁄U ‹ ¡Ê ⁄U„ „Ò¥– „Ê‹Ê¥Á∑§, flQ§ ∑§Ë ◊Ê¥ª ÃÙ ª⁄UË’Ë „≈UÊŸ, ‚ÊˇÊ⁄UÃÊ, ‚’∑§Ù•ÊflÊ‚, Á∑§‚ÊŸÙ¥ ∑§Ë •Ê¡ËÁfl∑§Ê ◊¥ ‚ÈœÊ⁄U, ‡Ê„⁄UË-ª˝Ê◊ËáÊ ∑§Ê »§∑§¸ πà◊ ∑§⁄UŸ •ı⁄U •ÊÃ¥∑§flÊŒ ∑§Ù ∑§Èø‹Ÿ ¡Ò‚ ◊„àfl¬Íáʸ ◊ÈŒ˜ŒÙ¥ ¬⁄U•Ê◊ ‚„◊Áà ∑§Êÿ◊ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§Ë „Ò– ÿÁŒ Áfl¬ˇÊË Œ‹ Œ‡Ê ∑§Ë Ã⁄UP§Ë •ı⁄U¡Ÿ∑§ÀÿÊáÊ ∑‘§ ¬˝Áà ª¥÷Ë⁄U „Ùà ÃÙ ‚¥‚Œ ∑‘§ ’Ê„⁄U •ı⁄U ÷ËÃ⁄U ’„‚ •Áœ∑§ ⁄UøŸÊà◊∑§ ÃÕÊ ‚ÊÕ¸∑§ „ÙÃË–

•Êß∞, ÕÙ«∏Ê Δ„⁄U∑§⁄U ‚¥ÁflœÊŸ ∑‘§ ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ ∑‘§ ©à‚fl •ı⁄U «ÊÚ. ÷Ë◊⁄UÊfl•Ê¥’«∑§⁄U ∑§Ë vwzflË¥ ¡ÿ¥ÃË ◊ŸÊŸ ∑‘§ Á‹∞ •ÊÿÙÁ¡Ã ‚¥‚Œ ∑‘§ ŒÙ ÁŒfl‚ËÿÁfl‡Ê· ‚òÊ ∑§Ê ◊„àfl ‚◊¤Ê¥– ß‚∑‘§ ¬Ë¿ ◊Í‹ ÁfløÊ⁄U ‚¥ÁflœÊŸ ‚÷Ê ∑§Ë ’„‚,÷Ê⁄Uà ∑‘§ ◊„ÊŸ ‚¬ÍÃÙ¥ ∑‘§ ∞ÁÄÊÁ‚∑§ ÷Ê·áÊÙ¥ •ı⁄U Œ‡Ê ∑‘§ ‹ÙªÙ¥ ∑§Ë •¬ˇÊÊ-

⁄UÊCÔ˛U ÁŸ◊ʸáÊ ◊¥ ÃÙ Áfl¬ˇÊ ‚„ÿÙª ŒDec 10, 2015

- ∞◊. fl¥∑Ò§ÿÊ ŸÊÿ«Í (∑‘§¥Œ˝Ëÿ ‡Ê„⁄UË Áfl∑§Ê‚, •ÊflÊ‚ •ı⁄U ‚¥‚ŒËÿ ◊Ê◊‹Ù¥ ∑‘§ ◊¥òÊË)

Page 10: What National Herald case all about

8

•Ê∑§Ê¥ˇÊÊ•Ù¥ ¬⁄U ªı⁄U ∑§⁄UŸÊ ÕÊ– ◊È¤Ê ÿ„ Œπ∑§⁄U ÁŸ⁄UʇÊÊ „È߸ Á∑§ ß‚ ◊ı∑‘§ ¬⁄U’„‚ ∑‘§ Œı⁄UÊŸ ◊ı¡ÍŒÊ øÈŸıÁÃÿÙ¥ ¬⁄U ÁfløÊ⁄U ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§Ë ’¡Êÿ „◊ ∞∑§-ŒÍ‚⁄U¬⁄U „ÊflË „ÙŸ ∑§Ë ∑§ÙÁ‡Ê‡Ê ∑§⁄Uà ⁄U„¥– •’ ÿ„ ŒπŸ ∑§Ê flQ§ •Ê ªÿÊ „Ò Á∑§¡ŸÃÊ ∑§Ë •¬ˇÊÊ-•Ê∑§Ê¥ˇÊÊ∞¥ ∑§„Ê¥ Ã∑§ ¬Í⁄UË „È߸ „Ò¥– ÁŸ:‚¥Œ„ ’Ê’Ê‚Ê„’ ÁŒ‹•ı⁄U ÁŒ◊ʪ ∑‘§ ªÈáÊÙ¥ flÊ‹ ∑§Œ˜?ŒÊfl⁄U ⁄UÊC˝Ëÿ ŸÃÊ Õ– Á„¥ŒÍ ‚◊Ê¡ ∑§Ë•‚◊ÊŸÃÊ•Ù¥ ∑§Ù ©ã„Ù¥Ÿ ‚èÿÃʪà πÊ◊Ë ∑§Ë Ã⁄U„ ŒπÊ •ı⁄U ß‚ ŒÍ⁄U ∑§⁄UŸ∑‘§ Á‹∞ ¡ËflŸ ‚◊Á¬¸Ã ∑§⁄U ÁŒÿÊ–

«ÊÚ. •Ê¥’«∑§⁄U ◊„ÊŸ ‚Ê◊ÊÁ¡∑§ ÿÙhÊ Õ •ı⁄U •¬ŸË ¬˝π⁄U ’ÈÁh •ı⁄UÿÙÇÿÃÊ•Ù¥ ∑‘§ ∑§Ê⁄UáÊ ‚Ê⁄UË •«∏øŸÙ¥, πÊÁ◊ÿÙ¥ fl •¬◊ÊŸ ∑§Ù ◊Êà Œ∑§⁄U©ã„Ù¥Ÿ •¬ŸË ¡ª„ ’ŸÊ߸– ß‚∑‘§ ’ÊŒ ÷Ë ©Ÿ∑‘§ ⁄UÊ¡ŸËÁÃ∑§ Áø¥ÃŸ ◊¥ Ÿ»§⁄UÃfl ‡ÊòÊÈÃÊ ∑§Ù ∑§Ù߸ SÕÊŸ Ÿ„Ë¥ ÕÊ– ©Ÿ∑§Ë ‹«∏Ê߸ ‚◊Ê¡ ∑‘§ ŒÙ◊È¥„¬Ÿ,Áfl⁄UÙœÊ÷Ê‚ •ı⁄U ’È⁄UÊßÿÙ¥ ‚ ÕË, Á„¥ŒÍ ‚◊Ê¡ •ı⁄U ‚èÿÃÊ ‚ Ÿ„Ë¥– ÄUÿÙ¥Á∑§©Ÿ∑‘§ Á‹∞ ⁄UÊC˝flÊŒ ∑§Ê ◊Ë’ Á‚»§¸ Á’˝≈UŸ ‚ ‚ûÊÊ ∑§Ê „SÃÊ¥Ã⁄UáÊ Ÿ„Ë¥ ’ÁÀ∑§ ⁄UÊC˝ ∑§Ê ¬ÈŸÁŸ¸◊ʸáÊ ÕÊ– •Ê¡ ÷Ê⁄Uà Ÿ ¡Ù ÷Ë „ÒÁ‚ÿà „ÊÁ‚‹ ∑§Ë„Ò ©‚◊¥ ©Ÿ∑§Ê ’„Èà ’«∏Ê ÿÙªŒÊŸ „Ò– fl ◊„ÊŸ •Õ¸‡ÊÊSòÊË ÷Ë Õ •ı⁄U ©ã„Ù¥Ÿ“L§¬∞ ∑§Ë ‚◊SÿÊ” ß‚∑§Ê “◊Í‹ •ı⁄U ‚◊ʜʟ” Áfl·ÿ ¬⁄U ¬Ë∞ø«Ë ÷Ë ∑§Ë ÕË– ÿ «ÊÚ. •Ê¥’«∑§⁄U „Ë Õ, Á¡ã„Ù¥Ÿ ‚¥flÒœÊÁŸ∑§ √ÿflSÕÊ◊¥ ‚’‚ ¬„‹ ÁflûÊËÿ ‚¥ÉÊflÊŒ ∑§Ë •flœÊ⁄UáÊÊ ⁄UπË– ∑‘§¥Œ˝ •ı⁄U ⁄UÊíÿÙ¥ ∑‘§ ’Ëø⁄UÊ¡Sfl ∑§Ê ’¥≈UflÊ⁄UÊ fl ¬˝Ê¥ÃÙ¥ ∑§Ë ÁflûÊËÿ SflÊÿûÊÃÊ, «ÊÚ. •Ê¥’«∑§⁄U ∑‘§ √ÿʬ∑§‡ÊÙœ ¬⁄U „Ë •ÊœÊÁ⁄Uà „Ò– ÷Ê⁄UÃËÿ Á⁄U¡fl¸ ’Ò¥∑§ ∑§Ë SÕʬŸÊ ◊¥ ÷Ë ©Ÿ∑§Ê◊„àfl¬Íáʸ ÿÙªŒÊŸ ÕÊ–

¡ÊÁÃÿÙ¥ ∑§Ù ⁄UÊC˝ Áfl⁄UÙœË ’ÃÊà „È∞ «ÊÚ. •Ê¥’«∑§⁄U Ÿ ∑§„Ê Á∑§ ߟ∑‘§∑§Ê⁄UáÊ ‚Ê◊ÊÁ¡∑§ ¡ËflŸ ◊¥ •‹ªÊfl, ŒÈ÷ʸflŸÊ •ı⁄U ߸cÿÊ ¬ÒŒÊ „ÙÃË „Ò– ©ã„Ù¥Ÿ∑§„Ê, “ÿÁŒ „◊ ⁄ÊCÔ˛U ∑§Ù „∑§Ë∑§Ã ∑§Ê M§¬ ŒŸÊ øÊ„Ã „Ò¥ Ã٠ߟ ‚’ ∑§ÁΔŸÊßÿÙ¥‚ ©’⁄UŸÊ „ÙªÊ, ÄUÿÙ¥Á∑§ Á∑§‚Ë ⁄UÊCÔ˛U ◊¥ ÷Ê߸øÊ⁄UÊ „Ë ∞∑§◊ÊòÊ Ãâÿ „ÙÃÊ „Ò–

Page 11: What National Herald case all about

9

ß‚∑‘§ Á’ŸÊ ‚◊ÊŸÃÊ fl SflÃ¥òÊÃÊ ⁄U¥ª-⁄UÙªŸ ∑§Ë Ã⁄U„ ‚Ã„Ë „Ù¥ªË–” fl ◊Í‹∑§ÊŸÍŸÙ¥- ÁŒflÊŸË •ı⁄U •Ê¬⁄UÊÁœ∑§ ∑§ÊŸÍŸÙ¥ ◊¥ ∞∑§M§¬ÃÊ øÊ„Ã Õ, ß‚ËÁ‹∞Á„¥ŒÍ ∑§Ù« Á’‹ ¬ÊÁ⁄Uà „Ùà Ÿ Œπ∑§⁄U ©ã„Ù¥Ÿ ∑‘§¥Œ˝Ëÿ ◊¥ÁòÊ◊¥«‹ ‚ ßSÃË»§Ê ŒÁŒÿÊ ÕÊ– fl ¡¡Ù¥ mÊ⁄UÊ ¡¡Ù¥ ∑‘§ øÿŸ ∑‘§ ÷Ë Áπ‹Ê»§ Õ– ©ã„Ù¥Ÿ ∑§„Ê ÕÊ,“øË»§ ¡ÁS≈U‚ ∑§Ù ¡¡Ù¥ ∑§Ë ÁŸÿÈÁQ§ ¬⁄U flË≈UÙ ∑§⁄UŸ ŒŸÊ flÊSÃfl ◊¥ ©ã„¥ ∞‚Ê•Áœ∑§Ê⁄U ŒŸÊ „Ò, ¡Ù „◊ ⁄UÊC˝¬Áà ÿÊ ‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄U ∑§Ù ÷Ë Ÿ„Ë¥ ŒŸÊ øʄÖ” «ÊÚ.•Ê¥’«∑§⁄U ∑§Ë ◊Í‹÷Íà Áø¥ÃÊ ŒÁ‹Ã flªÙ¥¸, ◊Á„‹Ê•Ù¥ •ı⁄U •À¬‚¥Åÿ∑§Ù¥ ∑§Ë‚Ê◊ÊÁ¡∑§ Œ◊Ÿ ‚ ◊ÈÁQ§ ÕË–

¡„Ê¥ ŒÁ‹ÃÙ¥, Á¬¿«∏ flªÙ¥¸ •ı⁄U ◊Á„‹Ê•Ù¥ ∑‘§ Á‹∞ ‚¥ÁflœÊŸ ◊¥ Áfl‡Ê·¬˝ÊflœÊŸÙ¥ ‚ •Ê⁄UˇÊáÊ ŸËÁà ‚Ê◊Ÿ •Ê߸ •ı⁄U ∑§Ù߸ ‡Ê∑§ Ÿ„Ë¥ Á∑§ ß‚∑§Ê ©Ÿ∑§Ë‚Ê◊ÊÁ¡∑§-•ÊÁÕ¸∑§ „ÒÁ‚ÿà ¬⁄U ‚∑§Ê⁄UÊà◊∑§ ¬˝÷Êfl ¬«∏Ê, ‹Á∑§Ÿ ©Ÿ∑‘§ •ı⁄U‚◊Ê¡ ∑‘§ •ãÿ flªÙ¥¸ ∑‘§ ’Ëø Áfl∑§Ê‚ ∑‘§ ∑§ß¸ ‚Íø∑§Ê¥∑§Ù¥ ¬⁄U •¥Ã⁄U •’ ÷Ë’⁄U∑§⁄UÊ⁄U „Ò– •Ê¡ÊŒË ∑‘§ {} fl·Ù¥¸ ’ÊŒ ÷Ë „◊Ê⁄UÊ Œ‡Ê ÁŸ⁄UˇÊ⁄UÃÊ (w{ »§Ë‚ŒË),ª⁄UË’Ë (ww »§Ë‚ŒË ª⁄UË’Ë ⁄UπÊ ∑‘§ ŸËø), ÷˝ÍáÊ „àÿÊ, Œ„¡, •S¬Î‡ÿÃÊ,◊Á„‹Ê •àÿÊøÊ⁄U, ⁄UÊ¡ŸËÁà ◊¥ œŸ’‹, ⁄UÊíÿÙ¥ ∑‘§ Á‹∞ Áfl‡Ê· áʸ •ı⁄U Ÿß¸¡ÊÁÃÿÙ¥ ∑§Ù •¡Ê, ¡¡Ê ÿÊ Á¬¿«∏Ê flª¸ üÊáÊË ◊¥ ‹Ê∞ ¡ÊŸ ∑‘§ Á‹∞ ◊Ê⁄UÊ-◊Ê⁄UË ¡Ò‚Ë ’È⁄UÊßÿÙ¥ ‚ ‹«∏ ⁄U„Ê „Ò– Œ‡Ê ◊¥ ŒÙ ∑§⁄UÙ«∏ ◊∑§ÊŸÙ¥ ∑§Ë ∑§◊Ë, wx»§Ë‚ŒË ‹ÙªÙ¥ Ã∑§ Á’¡‹Ë ∑§Ë ¬„È¥ø Ÿ„Ë¥ „Ò •ı⁄U v~.y~ ∑§⁄UÙ«∏ ‹Ùª ∑§È¬Ù·áÊ ¡È¤Ê ⁄U„ „Ò¥– flQ§ •Ê ªÿÊ „Ò Á∑§ flÒ◊ŸSÿ »Ò§‹ÊŸ flÊ‹Ù¥ ∑§Ù‚◊¤ÊŸÊ „ÙªÊ Á∑§ ß‚∑§Ê ©‹≈UÊ ¬Á⁄UáÊÊ◊ „٪ʖ ¡Ò‚Ê ’¥ª‹ÈM§ ◊¥ „È•Ê, ¡„Ê¥∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ŸÃÊ ∑§Ù Ÿ∑§Ê⁄Uà „È∞ Sflë¿ ÷Ê⁄Uà ÃÕÊ ◊∑§ ߟ ߥÁ«ÿÊ ∑§Êÿ¸∑˝§◊ ∑§Ê ‚◊Õ¸Ÿ Á∑§ÿÊ ªÿÊ–

‹Ùª •’ ⁄UÊ¡ŸËÁÃ∑§ M§¬ ‚ •¬Ÿ •Áœ∑§Ê⁄UÙ¥ ∑‘§ ¬˝Áà ¡ÊªM§∑§ „Ùª∞ „Ò¥– ◊Ê◊Í‹Ë ∑§Ê⁄UáÊÙ¥ ‚ ‚¥‚Œ ∑§Ù Ÿ ø‹Ÿ ŒŸÊ fl ¬‚¥Œ Ÿ„Ë¥ ∑§⁄UÖ⁄UÊ¡ŸËÁÃ∑§ Œ‹ ß‚ ¬⁄U •Êà◊-¬⁄UˡÊáÊ ∑§⁄U¥ ÃÙ ’„Ã⁄U „٪ʖ ÄUÿÊ ÷Ê⁄UË

Page 12: What National Herald case all about

10

¡ŸÊŒ‡Ê ∑§Ù SflË∑§Ê⁄U ∑§⁄UŸÊ ©Ÿ∑‘§ Á‹∞ ßÃŸÊ ∑§ÁΔŸ „Ò? ¬˝Õ◊ ¬˝œÊŸ◊¥òÊË¡flÊ„⁄U‹Ê‹ Ÿ„M§ ∑‘§ ÿÙªŒÊŸ ∑§Ù ◊ÊãÿÃÊ Ÿ ŒŸ ∑‘§ ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ∑‘§ •Ê⁄UÙ¬ ¬⁄U ◊Ò¥’Á„ø∑§ ÿ„ ÉÊÙ·áÊÊ ∑§⁄UŸÊ øÊ„ÃÊ „Í¥ Á∑§ „◊ Ÿ„M§¡Ë ∑§Ê ‚ê◊ÊŸ ∑§⁄Uà „Ò¥•ı⁄U ©Ÿ∑‘§ ÿÙªŒÊŸ ∑§Ë •ŸŒπË ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§Ê „◊Ê⁄UÊ ∑§÷Ë ß⁄UÊŒÊ Ÿ„Ë¥ ÕÊ– Á∑§¥ÃÈ‚ÊÕ „Ë ◊Ò¥ ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ŸÃÊ•Ù¥ ‚ ¡ÊŸŸÊ øÊ„Í¥ªÊ Á∑§ ÄUÿÙ¥ ©Ÿ∑§Ë ‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄UÙ¥ Ÿ «ÊÚ. •Ê¥’«∑§⁄U, ‚È÷Ê·ø¥Œ˝ ’Ù‚, «ÊÚ. ⁄UÊ¡¥Œ˝ ¬˝‚ÊŒ •ı⁄U ‚⁄UŒÊ⁄U ¬≈U‹ ¡Ò‚◊„ÊŸ ‹ÙªÙ¥ ∑‘§ ◊„àfl¬Íáʸ ÿÙªŒÊŸ ∑§Ù ©Áøà ‚ê◊ÊŸ Ÿ„Ë¥ ÁŒÿÊ?

ÄUÿÊ ‚ÙŒ˜Œ‡ÿ¬Íáʸ •ı⁄U Áfl∑§Ê‚ ‹ÊŸ flÊ‹Ë ÿÙ¡ŸÊ•Ù¥ ¬⁄U Áfl¬ˇÊË Œ‹Ù¥∑§Ê ‚◊Õ¸Ÿ ◊Ê¥ªŸÊ ∑§Ù߸ ’„Èà ’«∏Ë ◊Ê¥ª „Ò? •’ flQ§ •Ê ªÿÊ „Ò Á∑§ „◊‚’ Á◊‹∑§⁄U ‚◊ÊŸ ŸÊªÁ⁄U∑§ ‚¥Á„ÃÊ ’ŸÊŸ, œÙπÊŒÊÿ∑§ Ã⁄UË∑§Ù¥ ‚ œ◊Ê¥¸Ã⁄UáÊ⁄UÙ∑§Ÿ, ‚fl¸Á‡ÊˇÊÊ, ◊Á„‹Ê•Ù¥ ∑‘§ ‚‡ÊQ§Ë∑§⁄UáÊ •ı⁄U •Ê⁄UˇÊáÊ ∑§Ù ‹ÊªÍ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑‘§Á‹∞ „◊ ‚’ Á◊‹∑§⁄U ‚¥ÉÊ·¸ ∑§⁄U¥– „◊ •ÊÁÕ¸∑§ Áfl·◊ÃÊ ÉÊ≈UÊ∞¥, πÃË ∑§Ù‹Ê÷¬˝Œ ’ŸÊ∞¥, œ◊¸ fl ¡ÊÁà ∑§Ë ⁄UÊ¡ŸËÁà fl ß‚∑§Ê ∑§Ê •¬⁄UÊœË∑§⁄UáÊ ’¥Œ∑§⁄U¥, ÷˝CÊøÊ⁄U, œŒÈ˝◊-œ◊¸ÁŸ⁄U¬ˇÊÃÊ, •ÊÃ¥∑§flÊŒ ∑§Ù ⁄UÙ∑‘§¥– ÁflŒ‡ÊË ¡◊ËŸ ¬⁄U¡Ê∑§⁄U ‹ÙªÙ¥ ‚ ‹Ù∑§ÃÊ¥ÁòÊ∑§ ¬hÁà ‚ øÈŸ ª∞ ¬˝œÊŸ◊¥òÊË ∑§Ù ©πÊ«∏ »‘§¥∑§Ÿ∑§Ë ’Êà Ÿ ∑§⁄U¥ •ı⁄U ÉÊ⁄U‹Í ◊ÈŒ˜ŒÙ¥ ¬⁄U ‚¥ÿÈQ§ ⁄UÊCÔ˛U, •◊Á⁄U∑§Ê •ı⁄U Á’˝≈UŸ ¡Ê∑§⁄Ufl„Ê¥ ∑‘§ ¬ŒÊÁœ∑§ÊÁ⁄UÿÙ¥ ∑‘§ •Êª ªÈ„Ê⁄U Ÿ ‹ªÊ∞¥–

Page 13: What National Herald case all about

It is ironical that the Congress, which was at the vanguardof the freedom movement and Constitution-making, laterbecame the party which mutilated the Constitution and robbedit of its founding principles

On November 26, Parliament observed the ConstitutionDay and leaders of various political parties hailed the Republic'sfounding fathers for their diligence and foresight while draftingthe country's Constitution.

Since we happen to be the world's largest democracy andalso the most diverse society, the success of the democraticprocess over the last six decades is certainly a matter of pride forevery Indian citizen. This is the most extraordinary human experiment in the world because nowhere else can one finddemocracy co-existing with such poverty and diversity.

Therefore, despite all their faults and inadequacies, allstake-holders in the democratic process deserve congratulationsand they include the people, their representatives and all thepolitical parties.

Among political parties, the Congress takes pride in thefact that it led the freedom movement and played a key role inConstitution-making. While speaking in the Lok Sabha, Congresspresident Sonia Gandhi drew attention to this fact and said thehistory of our Constitution "is inextricably linked with that of thefreedom movement and therefore of the Congress". This is indeed true and this very fact imposes a special

11

HOW THE CONGRESS HAD WRECKED CONSTITUTION

A Surya Prakash|08 December 2015

Page 14: What National Herald case all about

12

responsibility on India's oldest party to uphold the highest valuesembedded in our Constitution.

The Congress president also said the Constitution hadseen over a hundred amendments, "a number of them inresponse to changing circumstances and emerging challenges".This is also true, though not all amendments would stand thescrutiny of even those who having only a nodding acquaintancewith the core principles enshrined in democratic constitutions.

An unfortunate example of this would be the 39thAmendment, which nullified the June 1975 verdict of theAllahabad High Court which had found Prime Minister IndiraGandhi guilty of corrupt electoral practice.

This amendment was hustled through the two Houses ofParliament and State Assemblies in order to prohibit the courtsfrom entertaining election petitions against the Prime Minister.In gross violation of parliamentary rules, it was introduced andpassed in the Lok Sabha on August 7, 1975 and again introducedand passed in the Rajya Sabha on the very next day. Then a miracle happened! As many as 17 State Assemblies, summonedon Saturday, August 9 ratified this amendment and an amenablePresident gave his assent on Sunday, August 10 and the ever-obliging civil servants of those days opened offices that verySunday to notify the amendment.

Why this break-neck speed, you may ask? Because theSupreme Court was to hear Indira Gandhi's petition on August 11and the Government's lawyers had to tell the court that theConstitution stood amended and Parliament had decreed thatelection petitions against the Prime Minister were henceforthout-of-bounds for it!

In the course of her speech, Ms Gandhi quoted BRAmbedkar as having said: "However good a Constitution may be,it is sure to turn out bad because those who are called to work ithappen to be a bad lot…………." Ms Gandhi also said the ideals

Page 15: What National Herald case all about

13

and principles that are embedded in our Constitution and thathave inspired us for decades are now under assault. What wehave witnessed these past few months particularly are a complete negation of what our Constitution stands for and guarantees".

If we reflect over the events during the dreadedEmergency in 1975-1977, when the Congress imposed a dictatorship in the country and flung the core values of ourConstitution out of the window, we realise how true Ambedkarwas. It will also help us get a correct gauge of current politicaldisturbances if we juxtapose the present debate on the so-calledintolerance with the horrendous assault on our democratic system 40 years ago.

The 39 Amendment was just for starters. It put the thenPrime Minister above the law and nullified Article 14 which guaranteed equality before the law to all citizens. But the finalnail in the coffin was the 42 Amendment which clipped the wingsof the judiciary, removed brick-by-brick, the foundations onwhich the document stood and did such violence to the basicprinciples enshrined in it that the Constitution eventuallybecame a poor caricature of what Ambedkar and his colleagueshad given us.

The 42 Amendment introduced two provisions which canonly be described as reprehensible. First, it abolished the needfor quorum in Parliament and the State Legislatures. TheConstitution stipulates that at least 10 per cent of the membersmust be present in the Houses to transact business. This wasdone away with, thus making it possible for just a handful ofCongress MPs to sit late in Parliament and make laws for thecountry. Fortunately, the Janata Party, which defeated theCongress in the 1977 Lok Sabha election, corrected the mischiefand restored the Constitution to its original, pristine glory.

The other provision, which should make any democrathang his head in shame, was that which empowered the

Page 16: What National Herald case all about

14

President to amend the Constitution through an executive order!As anyone with a nodding acquaintance with the Constitution isaware, it is very difficult to amend the Constitution because theGovernment of the day cannot even change a full stop or acomma in it without securing the support of two-thirds of themembers in each House of Parliament.

Further, if the amendment involves the rights of theStates, the Assemblies of at least one half of the States will haveto ratify the amendment. Only then can the amendment bemade. The Congress found this to be too much of a rigmaroleand authorised the President to "adapt or modify the provision(in the Constitution) to remove the difficulty" through an executive order.

Apart from the Indian President during the Emergency,the only other heads of state to have had the power to amendtheir constitutions through executive order were Hitler andMussolini!

The Congress president concluded her speech on theConstitution by saying "it is to the protection and advancementof constitutional processes that we must re-dedicate ourselves".

It is indeed an irony that the Congress, which was at thevanguard of the freedom movement and Constitution-making,later became the party which mutilated the Constitution androbbed it of its founding principles like equality before law, rightto life and liberty and fundamental rights including the right tofreedom of expression.

Therefore, every citizen must feel gratified that this partyis now committed to advancement of "constitutional processes".This augurs well for our democratic well-being.

Page 17: What National Herald case all about

15

The Congress party characterises Modi as a dictator and by implication, presents Sonia as a democrat.Whether a popular leader is a dictator or a democrat is tested byconduct. An unpopular dictator is an oxymoron. A dictator maybecome unpopular but no unpopular person can ever become adictator. How a leader behaves when in position of power - particularly when his or her position is under threat - offers themost reliable test. A popular Indira Gandhi was tested twice.Once in 1969 when her senior colleagues dissented her individualistic style. She used State power, backstabbed theparty and defeated the party nominee in the election for thePresident of India and captured the party with the help of theenemies of the party by forging an ideological alliance withthem. This destroyed the democratic Congress party as thenation knew till then. She put the party under her virtual dictatorship. She changed the very paradigm of national politicsfrom politics of ethics and character to politics of power andsuccess. This brought out her dictatorial mind. The real dictatorin her came out when the Allahabad High Court unseated herfrom Parliament and the Supreme Court made her a PrimeMinister without voting rights in Parliament. She struck at thenation, imposed Emergency and, as Nani Palkhiwala said,defaced and defiled the Constitution, courts, Parliament,Opposition, media, and the people at large and put the wholenation under total dictatorship. It is 40 years since and still now,no one in the Congress or from the family of Indira Gandhi hassincerely regretted the Emergency. On the contrary, RajivGandhi, after he got four-fifths majority in the Lok Sabha in

'Democratic' Sonia Vs 'Dictatorial' ModiBy S Gurumurthy |10th December 2015.

Page 18: What National Herald case all about

16

1984, even tried to justify the Emergency. And that Congressparty and Sonia Gandhi, claiming to be the proud daughter-in-law of Indira Gandhi, are trying to brand NarendraModi as dictatorial - by implication, claiming to be democratic.Is it not time then that one compared the democratic credentials of Sonia and Modi?

Look at how the 'dictatorial' Narendra Modi conductedhimself when, just three years before he became the PrimeMinister, he was under tremendous pressure from theOpposition, media and even the courts. Sonia Gandhi and herparty had accused him of being the merchant of death. The UPA,which had made the CBI its Alsatian, used the agency to targethim in the Sohrabuddin case. The sordid story was exposed byThe New Indian Express (see articles titled, Fixing Shah, byFabrication, CBI Betrays Court, Bails Out Congress andInterrogating The Media - published in August 2010). The mediawas applauding every effort to fix and get rid of him. Yet, therewas no FIR against him. No complaint had been filed in any courtagainst him. No court had issued him summons. No court hadordered his examination by police. But the Special InvestigationTeam (SIT) on Gujarat riots summoned him for examination likepolice would summon any one at their discretion. He was as popular in Gujarat as he is now all over the country. He was apowerful and performing Chief Minister of Gujarat. Also he wasseen as the rising national leader within the BJP when the SITsummoned him. But he did not use his party to drum up supportfor him in the Assembly nor did his party stall Parliament. TheGujarat Assembly functioned and so did Parliament. He couldhave gathered a million people to give him a great ovation whenhe went to the SIT office to put pressure on the investigationand on the instigators of the case against him. He respected thesummons and drove to the SIT office in his car. He walked downthe lane leading to the SIT alone. He was grilled by the SIT forover eight hours. He answered their questions. Satisfied with hisanswers, the SIT finally exonerated him. But his adversaries

Page 19: What National Herald case all about

17

would not leave him. They charged the SIT with favouring him.Finally, the Supreme Court had to exonerate him twice - once,when the UPA was in power and next time, a few months ago.This is 'dictatorial' Modi's behaviour.

Now compare how the 'democratic' Sonia behaved afterthe National Herald case caught up with her, her son and herfamily loyalists. Here is the National Herald case in brief. InNovember 2012, Dr Subramanian Swamy exposed how SoniaGandhi and Rahul Gandhi have grabbed properties of NationalHerald worth thousands of crores through a convoluted criminalstrategy. After that, this newspaper carried a detailed article,National Herald Affair: It's Fraud All The Way (TNIE, November8, 2012), explaining the fraud. In January 2013, Dr Swamy fileda criminal complaint against Sonia, her son and family loyalists,including Motilal Vohra, the Congress party treasurer, chargingthem with conspiracy, fraud, cheating, and criminal breach oftrust to rob the shareholders and the public of thousands ofcrores. All this happened when the UPA was in power. RahulGandhi threatened to file a defamation suit against Dr Swamy.Swamy challenged him but Rahul ran away. In June 2014, a Delhicriminal court took cognisance of the offence and issued summons. Forthwith, Sonia Gandhi and other five accused,including Rahul, filed petitions in the Delhi High Court to quashthe criminal proceedings. They kept delaying the hearing tillthey thought they got the judge they felt comfortable with. Onejudge recused himself and so did the next. The matter went tothe third judge, who Sonia and her co-accused did not like, andhe too recused himself. All the accused petitioned to have the matter heard by the second judge who had recused himself earlier. The case was posted before the very judge, who Soniaand her co-accused felt comfortable with. It is that very samejudge, who decided on December 7, 2015 that the lower courthas rightly ordered their trial and summoned them, and askedthem to appear before the metropolitan magistrate. Still, hellbroke loose. The very next day the Congress president was seen

Page 20: What National Herald case all about

18

instigating her MPs to stall Parliament. When the Speaker askedthem why were they disturbing the House, they shouted theysaw in the National Herald case "political vendetta" and"democracy in danger". When the Speaker asked them to spellout what they want and offered to allow them to raise the issueand speak in the House, they ran away from speaking in theHouse. Obviously, they only had instructions to stall the House.The same theatrics were repeated in the Rajya Sabha. Not thatthey did not talk in the House. They couldn't. Why?

It needs no seer to say that the prosecution on theNational Herald fraud was an act of the judiciary and the Modigovernment had had nothing to do with it. There was no CBI orIncome Tax or the Enforcement Directorate in the picture whichcould link the prosecution to the government. It was the privatecomplaint of Dr Subramanian Swamy on which the magistrateheld that Sonia, Rahul and the four family loyalists had createda trust company fully controlled by them as a cloak or sham of a special purpose vehicle to convert public money and to acquirecontrol over thousands of crores of assets of National Herald.The court held that the accused acted as a consortium toachieve the nefarious purpose and asked them to face trial. Thiswas the prima facie assessment of the court under the law. Thegovernment had no role in this process at all. It was betweenSonia Gandhi and her co-conspirators on the one hand and Dr Subramanian Swamy on the other, with the court playing theneutral and judicial role. This order was passed in June 2014. DidSonia or Rahul or any of the accused or the Congress party evenhint that the magistrate had acted outside the law? StopParliament? In contrast, they all went to the Delhi High Court toquash the order and summons of the magistrate. The judge,whom they were comfortable with, decided on December 7 thatthey better face the criminal case as the magistrate had rightlydecided.

The very next day, the 'democratic Sonia' ordered herparty to stall Parliament. Even as she was overseeing the closure

Page 21: What National Herald case all about

19

of Parliament for the day on December 8 and her son was on aflying visit to Tamil Nadu to offer relief to the flood-affected people, their lawyers were standing before the magistrate and pleading that Sonia, Rahul and the otheraccused were "keen to appear before the court". Where isvendetta then, Madam Sonia? The court has granted them 10days and directed them to appear on December 19. It remainsto be seen whether the 'democratic' Sonia and Rahul will walkalone and appear before the court like Modi did before thepolice or gather a huge crowd for theatrics and disturb the court like the Gandhis disturbed the Shah Commission.

A caveat: Obviously stressed by the court notice oncharges of swallowing thousands of crores of properties ofNational Herald by using the Congress party, Sonia Gandhi said,"Why should I be scared of anyone? I am Indira Gandhi's daugh-ter-in-law." She said this after personally directing the Congressparty to halt Parliament on Tuesday. This is 'democratic' Sonia,the daughter-in-law of Indira Gandhi, the saviour of democracyin India, charging Modi with 'dictatorship'. There cannot be amore cruel joke on democracy.

The author is a well- known commentator on politicaland economic issues.

Page 22: What National Herald case all about

20

In disrupting Parliament over the National Herald case,the Congress displays extremely bad form, and worse judge-ment. The Herald case is in the court and the party must submitto the due process it so loudly swears by.

This means that Congress leaders must respect the courtsummons and explore the legal avenues to defend themselves.By all accounts, there are serious questions that the Congressneeds to answer on the manner in which The National Heraldwas bailed out and its assets brought under the control of a company promoted by four party leaders, including Sonia and Rahul Gandhi. By attributingmotives to the judicial proceedings instead, and stallingParliament, the Congress embarrasses itself and JawaharlalNehru, the founder of The National Herald and a stickler for parliamentary etiquette and political propriety.

The Congress's apparent strategy - of turning an issuethat belongs in a court of law into a political battle to be foughtin Parliament - blurs the lines between the parliamentary insti-tution, the party, and the family that rules it. Clearly, much ofthe party's anxiety and conspiracy-mongering in the matter hasto do with the fact that Sonia and Rahul Gandhi are among theaccused. But why should these or other party leaders beexempted from a court appearance if the judge considers it necessary? In fact, in stoking a clamour over the court summonsto the Gandhis, the party may be lending substance to thecharge that for the party, the Gandhi family has always been,and continues to be, more equal than others. Party leaders,especially Sonia Gandhi, have sought to draw parallels between

Go to courtEditorial | December 10, 2015.

Page 23: What National Herald case all about

21

the post-Emergency legal challenges that Indira Gandhi facedfrom the Janata government and the Herald case. But thecharges that have come to haunt the Congress have to do withthe period when it was in power. Its cries of vendetta politics orimputations that it is ranged against the might of state powernow seem diversionary.

Admittedly, the Herald case can potentially take thesheen off what its supporters have read as an upturn of sorts inCongress fortunes - the party found itself on the winning side inBihar and it also has the power to withhold its cooperation onthe crucial GST bill from the government. Yet, the Congress maybe scoring a self-goal in turning a civil dispute into an existentialpolitical battle and thereby turning the spotlight more fully onwhat can be seen as the questionable management of the family heirlooms. The party needs to urgently rethink the wis-dom of its strategy.

Page 24: What National Herald case all about

22

The bare facts exposed by Dr Subramanian Swamy on theNational Herald affair this month are eloquent, needing very lit-tle prose. The fraud is explicit without exposition. Here are thebasic facts. Financial crisis forced Associated Journals Limited(AJL), the publishers of National Herald newspaper founded byPandit Nehru, to close down the paper in 2008. To pay off theemployees to help the closure, the Congress Party had giveninterest-free loan of Rs 90 crore plus to AJL, then. With the news-paper shut, AJL had become a mere real estate company in 2008,with property in Delhi, Lucknow and Mumbai worth over Rs2,000 crore in its balance sheet. Against this, AJL owed just Rs 90-crore plus to the Congress. It had very little liability, besides. Thebalance real estate of AJL, left after paying off the dues toCongress, legally and morally belonged to AJL's thousand plusshareholders. Big and small, they had contributed Rs 89 lakh toAJL's capital, when the Rupee was hundred times more valuable.If AJL's real estate had been sold and cash distributed to theshareholders, Brahm Dev Narain, a teacher holding just 41equity shares in AJL, would have got some Rs 84,000. Hundredsof others would have got similar sums.

But, by deep design and defying both law and morals,Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi appropriated - actually misap-propriated - control of AJL's Rs 2,000-cr real estate without pay-ing a dime to AJL's shareholders. In just three months, betweenNovember 2010 and February 2011 and in three moves, controlof thousands of crore worth property passed onto the Gandhifamily. Here unfolds the sordid story.

As the first step, in November 2010, a trust company

National Herald affair: It's fraud all the wayBy S Gurumurthy | 08th November 2012

Page 25: What National Herald case all about

23

named "Young Indian" was mysteriously formed with a capital ofjust Rs 5 lakh, in which Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi owned 38per cent each (total 76 per cent) and two family retainers, MotilalVora and Oscar Fernandes, owned the balance 24 per cent, making it cent percent Gandhi family outfit.Second, the very next month, December 2010, the Gandhis gotthe Congress party to assign the Rs 90-cr plus loan given to AJL in2008 to Young Indian (read themselves) by paying to the partyjust Rs 50 lakh. The Congress wrote off the balance Rs 89.75 cr asirrecoverable. This creative - actually criminal - accounting sub-stituted Young Indian for the Congress, entitling Young Indian torecover Rs 90-cr plus due from AJL. Finally, in February 2011, AJLconverted the Rs 90-cr plus due to Young Indian into equityshares and allotted them. By this step, Young Indian becamealmost 99 per cent owner of AJL, and as much of the real estateof AJL. When AJL had assets worth Rs 2,000 cr, why should theCongress write off Rs 89.75 cr due from it as bad debt? Wouldthe Congress have done it for any person outside the Gandhifamily? And did the Congress Working Committee or AICC knowof, or consent to, donate Rs 89.75 cr to the Gandhis throughYoung Indian? More. In the founding documents of Young Indianthe one word that is totally absent is "Congress"! The design isself-evident. The Congress should be out completely and theGandhi family should exclusively grab control of the AJL's landsat Delhi, Lucknow and Mumbai worth thousands of crores for pittance. And it did happen.

The rest of Young Indian's story stinks even more. Withthe Gandhi family and loyalists holding its entire capital, thedirectors of Young Indian - besides Sonia and Rahul, are Vora,Oscar, Suman Dubey and Sam Pitroda - are time-tested friends ofthe family. But, what is the object of Young Indian? Young Indiansays its first annual report (April 27, 2012), "is engaged in activi-ties to inculcate in the minds of India's youth commitment to theideals of democratic and secular society".

Page 26: What National Herald case all about

24

See what is the first act of this idealist company, after its birth in November 2010, to "inculcate" suchideals in youth. Its annual report shows that the company forth-with started its "operations in December 2010", and as its firstact in pursuance of "its objects", it acquired the "loan owed" byAJL "for a consideration of Rs 50 lakh", by which it became AJL's99 per cent owner. So the first act of Young Indian to promoteidealism in Indian youth was to defraud the Congress party of Rs89.75 crore on the one hand and the shareholders of AJL of thousands of crores of money on the other. See how the plotthickens.

Young Indians' annual report discloses a further design - to alter the character of AJL itself. It says that AJLis recasting "its activities" to align its objects, Young Indian's"main objects". Finally to merge AJL into Young Indian? And "aspart of the restructuring exercise of" AJL, says the annual report,the "loan was converted into equity". A joke indeed! YoungIndian speaks as if it is helping to restructure AJL. Young Indian isa pauper. Its director's report shows that, from its inception inNovember 2010 to March 2012, its total income was - believe it- just Rs 800! Its total expenditure was Rs 69.79 lakh and its loss,after deducting its income (Rs 800) was Rs 69.78 lakh. Does theAJL, with huge real estate, need an asset-less and income-less pauper Young Indian for its restructure?

See the deepening design. Young Indian's annual reportintentionally conceals the crucial fact that the loan of Rs 90-crplus owed by AJL to it was originally due to the Congress party -the intention being that Young Indian looted the Congress shouldbe concealed. The report also suppresses the fact that AJL withasset base of a couple of thousands of crores had become(almost) its wholly-owned subsidiary. It says, in fine print, thatshareholders- who? Sonia, Rahul, Vora, Oscar, Dubey andPitroda! - will get information regarding the subsidiary onrequest.

Page 27: What National Herald case all about

25

This is a fraud on company law, which mandates that thedetails of the subsidiary be available to the public. More. YoungIndian also totally suppresses its 99 per cent holding in the AJLsaying that the shareholding "is treated as application on theobject of the company" and so "the same has not been reflectedas an investment in shares". This deceptive accounting jargonmeans that the payment of `50 lakh for 99 per cent of shares ofthe AJL worth thousands of crores is shown not as an asset, butas expenditure! Why? Obvious.

To keep the investment out of the balance sheet of YoungIndian! The annual report blatantly lies that since the net worthof AJL is negative, its investment in 99 per cent capital of AJL iswritten off as expenditure.

The balance sheet of AJL as on March 31, 2011, shows apositive net worth Rs 8 crore; of which Young Indian's 99 percent share is Rs 7.92 cr. So the negative net worth story is a fab-rication. The real net worth of Young Indian is, of course, over Rs2,000 cr.

And the final lie. After Dr Swamy's expose, the Congress,with tears in its eyes, told the nation on November 3, 2012, thatrevival of National Herald, a symbol of Gandhi-Nehru ideals, wasan "emotional issue" for the party, as if it has paid Rs 90 cr plusnow for Herald's revival. It had paid the amount in 2008 to helpclose, not revive, the Herald. Just three weeks before theCongress shed tears to revive National Herald, on October 11,2012, 'The Pioneer' newspaper reported that Rahul Gandhi wasemphatic that Young Indian had no intention of relaunching anynewspaper. By an email to 'The Pioneer', Rahul Gandhi's officesaid: "Young Indian is a not-for-profit company and does nothave commercial operations.... The company has no intention ofstarting any newspaper". Any more evidence needed to provethat the sobbing story of Herald's revival is fake? A post facto lie?

So. The Gandhi family usurping the AJL's Rs 2,000 cr real

Page 28: What National Herald case all about

26

estate, with the funds of the Congress and through Young Indian,is fraud all the way. On the Congress. On the shareholders of AJL.And on the National Herald.

Pandit Nehru said: "I will not let the National Herald closedown even if I have to sell (my own house) Anand Bhawan". Andnow? The Gandhis have buried the National Herald and looted itsreal estate.

S. Gurumurthy is a well-known commentator on politicaland economic issues.

E-mail: [email protected]

Page 29: What National Herald case all about

27

Parliament is not the place to fightthe National Herald case

Whether or not the National Herald case, inwhich summons for personal appearance have beenissued by a trial court in New Delhi to Congressparty president Sonia Gandhi and vice-presidentRahul Gandhi, is a case of criminal breach of trust,as the complainant Subramaniam Swamy hasalleged, is a matter for the courts to decide.However, the fact remains that the developmenthas come at a singularly inopportune moment. Withthe battle lines being drawn between the Congressand the BJP, the peace brokered between the rulingparty and the principal opposition party by PrimeMinister Narendra Modi seems to have shattered.Hopes of vital legislation such as the Goods andServices Tax Bill or the new bankruptcy codebecoming law in this session of Parliament haveunfortunately receded. Once again, the core busi-ness of Parliament - legislation - has been stalled by

Wrong place, wrong timeEditorial | December 9, 2015.

Page 30: What National Herald case all about

28

issues that rightly, ought to be settled outside it. Butthis is hardly surprising. Our politicians, regardlessof party affiliation, have consistently put personalpolitical survival above larger national interests, andour elected representatives have seldom shown the ability to differentiate between constructive opposi-tion and blind political belligerence.

The issue, as outlined in the complaint, andreaffirmed by the Delhi High Court, which quashedthe plea seeking exemption from personal appearance, is certainly grave. Associated Journals,a company founded by Jawaharlal Nehru, whichused to publish Congress mouthpieces like NationalHerald and Qaumi Awaz, ceased operations in 2008,after which it was loaned about ?90 crore by theCongress party. Subsequently, in 2010, YoungIndian, a Section 25 (not-for-profit) company ofwhich 76 per cent is owned by Sonia and RahulGandhi, acquired Associated Journals for ?50 lakh.The deal included the company's outstanding debt,but also netted Young Indian property owned byAssociated Journals, which is estimated to have astreet value of between ?1,600 crore and ?2,000crore. Subsequently, the Congress party appears tohave written off Associated Journals' debt. Since the

Page 31: What National Herald case all about

29

principal parties involved in the transaction fromboth sides happen to be the same set of individuals,there is undoubtedly a question mark over the propriety of party funds being used to fund what isessentially a private transaction. The case hasinevitably acquired political overtones, given thatSwamy is now a senior BJP leader (he moved thepetition as head of the Janata Party) and the caseinvolves the Congress's top leadership.

But this is a battle that needs to be settled inthe courts, not in Parliament. Only the judiciary candecide whether the Gandhis are guilty or not of breaching the law. The Congress has many legitimate, even justified, differences on the GSTBill, which it can make a case for and attempt to win support. Stalling legislative business to fight proxypolitical battles only hurts the national interest.

Page 32: What National Herald case all about

30

In the summer of 1977, a bahu showedimmense courage as she returned to the constituency that had first sent her husband toParliament and, after re-electing her twice, hadvoted her out of power in March that year.

As the wife of Feroze Gandhi, the politicianand journalist who was also the publisher of TheNational Herald, Indira Gandhi had been his electioncampaign manager before becoming Raebareli'sMP. But on March 20, 1977, she had not only tastedhumiliating defeat in her pocket borough, but shehad also lost her prime ministership.

And yet, only a fewmonths after being punished by the electoratefor the Emergency, she wasreceived with unexpectedenthusiasm as she 'apolo-

gised' for the 21 months of 'excesses'.

National Herald case: Sonia and RahulGandhi fighting legal battle politically

By Indrajit Hazra | December 10, 2015.

Page 33: What National Herald case all about

31

It was from Raebareli in the summer of 1977that she launched her remarkable comeback byattacking the vindictiveness and incompetence ofthe ruling Janata Party.

Thirty-eight years later, another daughter-in-law of the Nehru-Gandhi family finds herself notjust out of power, but still in the freefall she and herparty experienced in May 2014. Like her saas,Indira's bahu is facing an existential crisis of a partyshe and her son lords over.

Like Mrs Gandhi 1.0, Mrs Gandhi 2.0 considersherself 'victimised' by the government of the day,which like the original Janata Party that had prematurely declared that it would "consign IndiraGandhi to the dustbin of history" is still working onits promise to "make India Congress-free".

But that's where the similarities end. WhenSonia Gandhi, responding to the Delhi High Courtrejecting the plea for quashing the summons forher, her son and others at a Delhi magistrate's courtfor The National Herald case, reminded us aboutdynasty - "I am Indira Gandhi's daughter-in-law andI am not scared of anyone" - what she did wasremind us, as well as herself, that the Gandhis-

Page 34: What National Herald case all about

32

Congress (interchangeable words those) has beenwhere it is now before, and pulled itself out of adeeper hole.

"I absolutely see a political vendetta. This is the way the central government works," saidCongress vicepresident Rahul Gandhi whose day jobnow seems to be the same as that of the old JanataParty leaders before they came to power andimploded: To be manically fixated on the evils of theprime minister.

Rahul Gandhi is hardly the only person whobelieves that the judiciary can be influenced bythings other than legal argument. The fact that thepetitioner against his mother and himself isSubramanian Swamy, who even if he is more of amigraine for the BJP than he is a headache for theCongress, makes it easier for the Gandhis to play thehounded victims.

Victimhood and being made targets of politicalvendetta has been a longstanding Congress weaponof choice.

The success of its use by post-EmergencyIndira Gandhi is the primal reason why Sonia and

Page 35: What National Herald case all about

33

Rahul are bent on establishing the government-rather than Swamy or the court - as the vicious bullyin the park. Past personal attacks exchangedbetween Prime Minister Narendra Modi and theGandhi duo also make this charge almost impossibleto deny.

And yet, while Indira Gandhi fought a politicalbattle and won it, Sonia & Son are fighting a legal battle politically at the cost of keeping Parliamentduring Modi's tenure under near-permanent lockout. But in politics where the ends will alwaysjustify the means, will fishing out dynasty and vic-timhood be fruitful for Indira's bahu and grandson?

It's doubtful for three reasons. One, it isn't1977 and the draw that Indira was even in her daysin the wilderness for India's vast electorate isunmatched by a cloistered Sonia Gandhi or Rahul,who seems to appear in the public domain with theforce of an angry ad break.

Two, the obsessive hatred towards Indiramade the Janata Party government bring nothing constructive to the table of governance, whichIndira Gandhi masterfully took advantage of. Thepresent government, for all its foot dragging, foot-

Page 36: What National Herald case all about

34

in-mouths and policy paralysis, is viewed as a stillunsuccessful, rather than unwilling, player.

It is the Congress, and those other parties carefully watching its stock to possibly hitch a ridewith it if and when the time comes, that is seen asobstructionist, both inside and outside Parliament.If the swell story doesn't arrive, the government willbe blamed. But the Congress will definitely not becoming out of this sour story alive.

Three, and most importantly, the brand equity of the Gandhi surname, which till a few yearsago was seen as the Congress' biggest USP, is nowwell past its sell-by date. The namedropping of Indira Gandhi by her daughter-in-law this week simply confirms how bereft of tricks the Gandhis-Congress are today.

Page 37: What National Herald case all about

35

Why Congress should not disruptParliament over a court case

The Congress should make a coherent andsensible political case for this alleged "vendetta" onthe floor of the House rather than disrupt itsfunctioning

Both Houses of Parliament were disruptedagain on Wednesday by angry members of theCongress Party protesting the summons of theparty's president and vice-president, Sonia Gandhiand Rahul Gandhi, by a Delhi court in a matter related to the transfer of control of the companythat used to publish the National Herald newspaper.On Tuesday, the Delhi High Court rejected anattempt to exempt the two senior Congress leaders,among others charged in the case, from a personal appearance in court. The high court also said theirconduct in the case "smacked of criminality". The

Losing CredibilityNow, Congress distrupts Parliment over a court case.

Editorial | December 09, 2015.

Page 38: What National Herald case all about

36

Congress has declared that the case, which follows acomplaint by Bharatiya Janata Party leaderSubramanian Swamy, is part of a political"vendetta". The criminal case deals with charges of

cheating and misappropriation of funds in the chainof events that included a large loan from theCongress' own treasury to the company controllingthe National Herald being bought over by a thirdorganisation at a fraction of the face value. As a con-sequence of the chain of transactions, controlpassed to a trust in which Sonia Gandhi and RahulGandhi were major shareholders. Mr Swamy's contention is that they thus illegally gained controlof an entity with substantial and valuable real-estate holdings.

The facts of the case and whether or not theGandhis' behaviour was criminal will be establishedby the legal process. It is to be hoped a resolutionwill be swift, since it is not in the interest of Indianpolitics or faith in the judicial system for such a high-profile case to be left hanging. The question, how-ever is this: What does this have to do with the functioning of Parliament? If there is indeed a political vendetta being launched against the

Page 39: What National Herald case all about

37

Opposition, then the leaders of the Congress surelymust make their case on the floor of the veryHouses that they are instead choosing to disrupt.This decision to disrupt is both irresponsible andimpolitic. It is irresponsible because Parliament hasa great deal of pending legislation, including important economic reform bills, that it must discuss. And it is impolitic because it only enhancesthe impression that the Congress Party is now noth-ing more than a support system for the Gandhi family - of which the alleged appropriation of partyresources by the family in the National Herald caseis only one illustration.

The Gandhis and the others associated withthem in the case - including former NationalKnowledge Commission member Sam Pitroda - areto appear in the trial court on December 19. What isthe Congress' endgame? Will it continue to disruptParliament every day till then? In this din, it is farfrom clear what specific accusations it is, in fact,making. Is it levelling charges on the independenceof the judiciary? After all, the problem was precipitated by an order from a high court judge.

Page 40: What National Herald case all about

38

The party is losing credibility by the minute. If itwishes to retain any, it must make a coherent andsensible political case for this alleged "vendetta" onthe floor of the House and submit it to the judgmentof the people of India.

Page 41: What National Herald case all about

39

Whatever be the merits of the charges againstthe principal office-bearers of the Congress party inthe 'National Herald' case, it is an issue that has tobe settled in a court of law, and not in the widerpolitical arena, much less in Parliament. If theCongress believes there has been no wrongdoing inthe transactions related to the acquisition ofAssociated Journals Private Ltd. by Young Indian, anon-profit company in which the party's president,Sonia Gandhi, and vice-president, Rahul Gandhi, arethe main shareholders, it must simply choose thejudicial route to establish their innocence. The DelhiHigh Court order upholding the trial court summonsto both of them, along with other directors of YoungIndian, is based on what it sees as prima facie evidence of criminality. The best way to deal withthe situation is to face it legally. When SubramanianSwamy first questioned the legality of the transactions, it was the Congress that challengedhim to take Ms. Gandhi and her son to court. "It is

The Gandhis must face the courtsEDITORIAL | December 10, 2015.

Page 42: What National Herald case all about

40

for those who make allegations to prove theircharges," the party had said in 2012. It cannot thenturn around now and say that the entire proceedings amount to political vendetta. Even ifthere is a political motive, the party's president andvice-president have to provide answers to the questions that have arisen from the trial court summons and the High Court's refusal to intervene.To disrupt Parliament on an issue that involves nolarger public interest goes against all democraticnorms, and it cannot be justified on any count.Indeed, to speak of political vendetta following acourt summons is to cast aspersions on the veryindependence of the judiciary.

A look at the facts of the case does make onedoubt whether AJL could not have protected itsshareholders' interests by liquidating some of itsassets in order to return its loan to the Congress.The floating of Young Indian, described by the courtas a 'special purpose vehicle', does cast some suspicion. At the same time, the weak point in Dr. Swamy's case seems to be the absence of anyidentifiable victim who has been cheated or whosefunds have been misappropriated. After all, the various assets of AJL still stand in its name and the

Page 43: What National Herald case all about

41

shareholders of Young Indian, which being a Section25 (non-profit) company, cannot get any dividend orprofit out of the company's rental income. TheCongress will have to believe in its own contentionthat there was no 'entrustment' in the first place foranyone's trust to be breached and that no oneclaims to be deceived or cheated. But the judicialprocess will have to be faced squarely withoutresort to political theatre. The charges of cheatingand criminal breach of trust against the Congressleaders will have to be countered only through thelegal route.

Page 44: What National Herald case all about

42

In the gambling dens of the "wild west" it wasa popular theory that "when you don't have thecards, best to kick the table over." The Congress isattempting precisely that by stirring up a politicalstorm in and beyond Parliament and seeking to playa victim/martyr card rather than "fight" theNational Herald case in the appropriate forum -thecourts. And that is what concerns people not directly involved in the dispute -are judicial actionsto be dragged through the filth of politics?Impacted, maybe even overturned, by shrill rheto-ric, mass protest, numbers in Parliament, and whathave you? It had been said long ago that when outof power the Congress is reckless in destroyingthose pillars of the democracy that do not happento prop it up (the "family", that is), and now theDelhi High Court is being virtually accused of functioning at government diktat. It would appearthat the self-styled "legal eagles" -Singhvi, Sibal andnow Tulsi too -are doing a Jethmalani by mounting

Old dirty trickEditorial|10 December 2015

Page 45: What National Herald case all about

43

external pressure on the courts rather than take alegal route. Would the trio have the guts to declarethe High Court's scathing observations as havingbeen drafted at the government's behest? This isnot just blatant contempt of the judicial system butissuing a licence to abuse it.

The National Herald case may have politicalmotivation: Subramanian Swamy's track record as atrouble-maker is well-known, but the fact that hehas -in this case, others too -convinced the courts ofprima facie irregularities cannot be discounted. Notby all the noise the "palace" is provoking. Not bytrying to seek sympathy by claiming Indira Gandhi'slegacy (not necessarily a positive endowment), orvia press conferences and TV jaw-jaw. The determination will be made by the courts. Period.

The charge of political vendetta may or maynot "stick", but it takes no great study of history todiscern who first subverted national institutions forpetty personal and political purpose: this newspaper could testify to having been "given thetreatment". Why, even till a couple of years ago theCBI etc are what cemented the UPA and its externalsupporters. The BJP might have presented itself

Page 46: What National Herald case all about

44

better had its lesser-lights not rushed into gloatingover the High Court's observations.

The real casualty would be matters beforeParliament; Rahul Gandhi and his disrupting regiment have another fig-leaf to cover their primepurpose of bringing governance to a halt. That themajor "protest" took place in the Rajya Sabha willonly accelerate the debate over the utility of the"Upper House". As for the GST Bill -MamataBanerjee has provided some insight by commentingthat "Rahul doesn't want it".

Page 47: What National Herald case all about

45

Prior to 2011, the company was in dire straits.But recent financial results show its fortunes are onthe mend

Under Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi, TheAssociated Journals has morphed from a companythat was bleeding crores into one that is makingprofit, filings with the Registrar of Companies show.While the profits are helping it write down the losses it had accumulated over time, the company isalso investing significantly in construction-relatedactivities that could potentially increase its revenueprospects, filings show.

It has reported profit before tax and extraordi-nary items in each of the three financial years thatfollowed its takeover by Young Indian, a not-for-prof-it controlled by Congress leaders Sonia Gandhi,Rahul Gandhi, Motilal Vora and Oscar Fernandes.

National Herald issue: How the Gandhifamily revived Associated Journals

By N Sunderasha Subramanian | December 2015.

Page 48: What National Herald case all about

46

The Associated Journals is at the centre of araging national political debate. After the Delhi HighCourt ruled that Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi willhave to appear in person in court over a plea filed byBharatiya Janata Party member SubramanianSwamy, the Congress has raised the political temperature in the country and called the movepolitical vendetta. The BJP-led government, meanwhile, has said it is a court order and it has norole to play in the whole affair.

Sometime between November 2010 andJanuary 2011, Young Indian took over the accumulated liabilities of Rs 90 crore on the booksof The Associated Journals and was in turn allottedshares amounting to nearly 99 per cent in the company. Swamy moved court in 2012, alleging thatthe transaction was unfair on the 1,000-odd originalshareholders of the company who were reduced toa minority following the deal and were hencedeprived of their rightful share in the real estateassets of the company. According to Swamy, theseassets were worth Rs 1,600 crore, three years ago.The value has since increased to Rs 2,000 crore, sayhis supporters.

Page 49: What National Herald case all about

47

How the Gandhi family revived AssociatedJournalsIn choppy waters

Prior to the takeover, The Associated Journalswas in dire straits. In the financial year ended March2008, the year its flagship, National Herald, was lastpublished, it booked a loss of Rs 5.96 crore, upalmost six times from Rs 1.01 crore in the previousyear. The spike was caused largely by the Rs 3.33crore irrecoverable rent and other past expensesthe company chose to write off that year.

On the income side, circulation revenueplunged to Rs 64.31 lakh in 2007-08 from Rs 2.86crore in the previous year. Advertisement incomefell around 30 per cent to Rs 2.57 crore from Rs 3.63crore. The only silver lining was rental income - itgrew to Rs 1.02 crore from Rs 86 lakh. As a sign ofoperations winding down, expenses on newsprintcame down from Rs 2.52 crore to Rs 63.17 lakh. But,salaries and wages grew to Rs 4.73 crore from Rs4.28 crore.

This was followed by more losses: Rs 33.78crore in 2008-09, Rs 1.9 crore in 2009-10 and Rs0.39 crore in 2010-11. The huge loss in 2008-09 wasdue to the voluntary retirement scheme for staff,

Page 50: What National Herald case all about

48

which increased the expenses on salaries and wagesto Rs 34.12 crore.

Much of that has changed now. Barring 2012-13, when it reported a net loss of Rs 4.65 crore afterwriting off exceptional items of over Rs 10.59 crore,the company booked net profits in two of the lastthree financial years for which records are available.In 2011-12, a year after the ownership changes, itbooked a profit of Rs 2.22 crore. In 2013-14, the lastyear it has reported its numbers for, The AssociatedJournals clocked a net profit of Rs 7.95 crore.

How the Gandhi family revived AssociatedJournals Its largest income source in 2013-14 was"rental income from investment property, long term"that stood at Rs 9.4 crore, up from Rs 6.02 crore in2012-13 and Rs 2.68 crore in 2011-12.

A part of this rental income is from the PassportSeva kendra operated by Tata Consultancy Services inHerald House in New Delhi from where the NationalHerald used to be published. Interest on fixeddeposits showed a steep fall to Rs 59,638 in 2013-14from Rs 14.10 lakh in the previous year, suggestingsome of these might have been redeemed.

Page 51: What National Herald case all about

49

On the expenditure side, electricity expensesof Rs 19.19 lakh and repairs to building of Rs 16.02lakh were among the biggest heads, followed bysecurity expenses of Rs 7.95 lakh and legal chargesof Rs 6.38 lakh.

Contractual payments and civic charges suchas water and property tax clubbed under miscellaneous expenses totalled Rs 84 lakh, up fromRs 68.77 lakh in 2012-13. Interest cost of Rs 2.48crore was by far the biggest expenditure but it wascapitalised under capital work in progress.

Shrinking losses

Analysis of The Associated Journals' filingsshows that the profits are gradually reducing theaccumulated losses on the balance sheet. At theend of 2013-14, the accumulated losses stood at Rs66.96 crore, down from Rs 72.50 crore reported atthe end of 2010-11, before the ownership changestook place.

Total fixed assets on The Associated Journals'books were Rs 1.71 crore at the end of 2013-14 -nowhere close to the thousands of crores thatSwamy says these are worth. According to the notes

Page 52: What National Herald case all about

50

to accounts in the annual report, "fixed assets arestated at cost, less accumulated depreciation."Email sent to the company elicited no response.

Tangible assets capital work in progress wasone of the biggest items in the 2013-14 balancesheet. The annual report showed that total "capitalwork in progress" stood at Rs 63.31 crore. Accordingto the annual report of the company, these con-structions were amongst the steps taken to restartNational Herald.

The company reported capital work inprogress in four locations: Mumbai, Panchkula,Patna and Lucknow. Mumbai had the highest closingbalance at Rs 36.35 crore, followed by Panchkula (Rs 14.8 crore) and Lucknow (Rs 11.94 crore).Patna's construction expenses stood at a modest Rs20.19 lakh and did not see any addition in the year.Filings showed that the Mumbai land in Bandra wasallotted by the government in 1983.

The company also noted an ongoing disputewith one Vishnu Goyal based in Indore over landand publication. "Relating to (the) land at Indore,the company had revoked in earlier years the general power of attorney issued in favour of Vishnu

Page 53: What National Herald case all about

51

Goyal for publication of National Herald by him fromIndore. The matter is sub judice before the Hon'bleSupreme Court of India…"

The turnaround in The Associated Journals'fortunes shows that it's not just political acumen,the Gandhi family also has a head for business.

Page 54: What National Herald case all about

52

The proposal for a Nehru memoriallibrary is not mentioned in the building

permission documents.Written by Kavitha Iyer Mumbai, Dec 10, 2015.

The AJL plot in Bandra.

Having remained vacant for three decades, aprime plot of land in suburban Mumbai, allotted bythe Maharashtra government to Associated JournalsLtd in 1983 for building a Nehru memorial library

In Mumbai, 'commercial building' riseson plot AJL got for Nehru library.

By Kavitha Iyer Mumbai |Dec 10, 2015.

Page 55: What National Herald case all about

53

and research centre, will now house a 11-storeyoffice building.

According to building permissions granted bythe Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation to thecompany that once published the National Herald,the newspaper launched by Nehru, and QaumiAwaz, the project is a "commercial building" comprising two levels of basement parking, anoffice and atrium on the ground floor and elevenfloors of offices.

The proposal for a Nehru memorial library is not mentioned in the building permission documents.

The plot of land is located in Bandra, along theWestern Express Highway. Measuring 3,478 sq m, itstands on part of a large plot earlier reserved for ahostel for Scheduled Caste students.

According to an August 1983 order, theMaharashtra government allotted the land to M/sAssociated Journals (Bombay) Ltd "for publication ofdaily newspapers and for establishing a NehruLibrary-cum-Research Institute" on payment of anoccupancy price.

Page 56: What National Herald case all about

54

Among the conditions imposed, the order by theadditional collector stated, "That the building to be con-structed by the grantee shall be exclusively used for thepurpose for which it is granted…"

For nearly three decades, the plot remainedvacant even as a parcel of the original larger plot washanded over to a housing society floated by Congressman Rajiv Chavan - former MumbaiCongress president Kripashankar Singh is a member ofthe society.

In the interim, while seeking removal of encroach-ments and realignment of its boundaries and alterationsto a BMC sewage pumping station on a part of the plot,Associated Journals also sought and received extensionsto complete construction on the plot.

By early 2012, the Associated Journals Ltd,through its chairman Motilal Vora, initiated steps toseek permissions for construction on the plot allotted to the company. All subsequent communicationfrom the BMC to Associated Journals regarding the con-struction refers to the project as a "proposed office building". A commencement certifi-cate was granted in June 2013 for a proposed "com-mercial building".

Page 57: What National Herald case all about

55

The building is now nearly four storeys high. Atthe site on Wednesday, a watchman called theupcoming construction a "Congress Bhavan".

Mumbai-based RTI activist Anil Galgali, who in2012 wrote to then chief minister Prithviraj Chavanand urged the government to take the plot of landback since no construction had begun for nearly 30years, told The Indian Express Wednesday that theland can still be taken back for non-compliance withthe original allotment conditions.

"Not only is there no proposal for a press orNehru memorial library in the under-constructionbuilding, the government land has also not beenused in a timely manner. I will write to ChiefMinister Devendra Fadnavis, seeking cancellation ofthe allotment," Galgali said.

While Associated Journals had previously runfoul of the government over lease dues, a letterfrom the suburban collector in 2010 stated thatoccupancy price of Rs 98,17,440 had been paid following an order in 2006 and there seemed to beno arrears of lease rent outstanding.

Page 58: What National Herald case all about

56

THE writer is Union minister for urban development, housing and urban poverty allevia-tion, and parliamentary affairs writes: PM Modiadmired globally, political opponents affectingimage of India

The special sitting of Parliament to commem-orate Ambedkar only saw parties try to scorebrownie points. Opposition must realise that thepeople are tiring of confrontational politics.

At a time when India is making rapid economic strides and regaining its rightful place inthe comity of nations after a decade of decadence,the political detractors of the BJP-led NDA, unableto countenance the growing appreciation of its poli-cies and programmes, have launched a campaign todefame and discredit the government. This increasing intolerance towards a government thatassumed power with a majority mandate stemsfrom the insecurity complex of a shrinking Congress

The limits of negativismArticle: Dec 9, 2015.

M. Venkaiah Naidu

Page 59: What National Herald case all about

57

and confused Left. In the process, they are trying toobfuscate the truth, rake up divisive and extraneousissues, whip up an atmosphere of fear, and derailthe development agenda.

Even as world powers are acknowledgingIndia's resurgence under the leadership of PrimeMinister Narendra Modi, the BJP's political opponents are trying to hijack the national politicaldiscourse, when the need of the hour is to have anall-round consensus on important issues. But whyare the political opponents at home getting into afrenzy over non-issues? Is it because they willbecome politically less relevant with the passage oftime, as the government is trying to fulfil the objectives enshrined in the Constitution? Had theseparties been serious about India's progress, debatesin Parliament and outside would have been moreconstructive and meaningful.

Let us pause and look at the significance of aspecial sitting of Parliament to celebrate theConstitution and commemorate the 125th birthanniversary of B.R. Ambedkar. The idea was to revisit Constituent Assembly debates, historicspeeches made by great sons of the country, and

Page 60: What National Herald case all about

58

peep into their vision for India. But I was disappointed that during the debate, we tried toscore brownie points over each other instead ofpondering on the challenges facing the country.

The time has come to assess the extent towhich the aspirations and expectations of the people have been fulfilled, while looking at the challenges before us. Babasaheb was a towering national leader, with great qualities of heart andhead. He looked at the inequities in Hindu society ascivilisational lacunae, and dedicated his life to eradicating them. Ambedkar was a great social war-rior. He carved a niche for himself on the basis of hisbrilliant capabilities and intellect, and braved theodds and insults of the time. Yet there was nohatred or animosity in his political thinking. His fightwas against the dichotomies, contradictions andevils of society, and not against Hindu society andcivilisation itself. For Ambedkar, nationalism was notthe mere transfer of power from the British, butmeant the reconstruction of the nation. His coreproject was nation-building. India owes to him theposition it has attained today. For instance, it wasAmbedkar who initially envisioned fiscal federalismin the constitutional scheme. The division of

Page 61: What National Herald case all about

59

revenue between the Centre and states was categorically dealt with in his comprehensive workon the financial autonomy of the provinces.

While favouring a federal form of governmentwith an independent judiciary, Ambedkar believedin uniformity in fundamental laws, civil and criminal. He resigned from the Union cabinet whenhe realised that the Hindu Code Bill would not bepassed. He was also not in favour of judges selectingjudges and had said that "to allow the chief justicepractically a veto upon the appointment of judges isreally to transfer the authority to the chief justicewhich we are not prepared to vest in the presidentor the government of the day."

Ambedkar's fundamental concern was to liberate untouchables, the depressed classes, vulnerable women and minorities from the clutchesof social oppression. While the provision of positivediscrimination for SCs, STs, OBCs and women in theConstitution has led to a reservation policy in education and employment, which has no doubthad a positive impact on their socio-economic condition, the gap between them and the rest ofsociety persists. While Ambedkar's message, work

Page 62: What National Herald case all about

60

and life are a guide for those at the helm, they alsohold up a mirror to us, pointing out the distance stillto be travelled to achieve the dreams of the founding fathers.

Even after 68 years of Independence, ourcountry is grappling with evils like illiteracy (26 percent), poverty (22 per cent), female foeticide,dowry, untouchability, atrocities on women, casteand communal politics, money power in politics,growing opportunism and defections, regional andeconomic disparities, the clamour for special statusfor states and the inclusion of more castes into theSC, ST and OBC categories.

It is sad that instead of strengthening democratic institutions, earlier regimes weakenedthem and tried to make them subservient toachieve political objectives. On the other hand,Modi, with his typical missionary zeal, is seeking totransform the country by improving the lot of everysection - sabka saath, sabka vikas - especially thesocially and economically vulnerable.

The time has come for those manufacturingdissent and indulging in a disinformation campaignto realise that such tactics won't pay, and might

Page 63: What National Herald case all about

61

boomerang sooner than later. The best example ofthis was the recent incident in Bangalore, when students overwhelmingly expressed support forSwachh Bharat and Make in India, stumping theCongress leader.

People have become politically aware andconscious of their rights. They abhor the wilful disruption of Parliament on flimsy pretexts. Is it sodifficult to respect the overwhelming mandate ofthe people? The biggest irony is that people whosubverted and sabotaged democracy, crippled fundamental rights, imposed censorship, put lakhsof people, opposition leaders and workers behindbars, amended the Constitution to suit individualwhims and fancies, and superseded judges to createa pliant, committed judiciary, are now preachingsermons.

On the Congress's charge that the NDA wasnot recognising the contributions of former PrimeMinister Jawaharlal Nehru, I would like to set therecord straight and declare in unambiguous termsthat we respect Nehruji and never intended toignore his contributions. At the same time, I wouldlike to know from Congress leaders why their

Page 64: What National Herald case all about

62

governments did not accord due respect and recognition to the monumental contributions madeby great men like Ambedkar, Subhas Chandra Bose,Rajendra Prasad and Sardar Patel. Saddened by theneglect of such stalwarts, we are now correcting historical wrongs and giving due recognition tothem. Yet the Congress seems to be terribly upsetby this and grudged the Ambedkar celebrations. Noparty or family can appropriate the country's freedom movement. It was a people's movement,an unprecedented struggle of the masses. TheCongress is simply unable to digest this fact.

Is it asking for too much from the oppositionparties to support well-meaning, development-oriented schemes in the interests of the people?People are in no mood to accept negativism or thepolitics of confrontation. They want collaborativepolitics that will make their lives better and theirfutures brighter.

The time has come for all people to strivetogether to ensure the enactment of a common civilcode, stopping conversions through fraudulentmeans, implementing sarva shiksha, empowering

Page 65: What National Herald case all about

women and reservations, bridging the yawningurban-rural divide, reducing economic disparities,making agriculture remunerative, stopping the playing of caste and religious politics, curbing the criminalisation of politics, eradicating corruption, curbing fundamentalism, sheddingpseudo-secularism, curbing terror, disapproving ofasking people on foreign soil to overthrow a democratically elected PM and petitioning authorities in the UN, US and UK on domestic issues.

63

Page 66: What National Herald case all about

64

Yes, Democracy in Danger due to vendetta politics

Points made by Shri M. Venkaiah Naidu, Minister forParliamentary Affairs at a Press Conference held atParliament Building on 9th December, 2015.

As reported in media today, senior Congressleader Shri Ghulam Nabi Azad, yesterday said thatthe democracy is in danger in the country. He saidso after the petition of Smt. Sonia Gandhi and ShriRahul Gandhi for exemption from appearing in thecourt in the National Herald case was rejected bythe Delhi High Court.

I agree with Shri Azad that democracy is indanger. However, the fact is that this danger is coming from none other than the Congress Party.

I also agree that vendetta politics are beingplayed out in the country but again it is theCongress which is doing so.

Not accepting the mandate of the people tothe Modi Government is a clear danger to democracy.

Page 67: What National Herald case all about

65

Trying to prevent governance and stalling legislations through un-constitutional and un-democratic tactics as is being done by Congressis a clear danger to democracy.

Making the highest forum of democracy,the Parliament of India dysfunctional through disruptions for no valid reasons is certain danger todemocracy and that's what the Congress is unfortunately doing.

Refusing to abide by the rules of democracyand resorting to the ways of mobocracy is a certaindanger to democracy. Congress is proving to befountain head of this mobocracy.

Taking objection to a judicial verdict andstalling Parliament is the biggest threat to democracy and Congress should realize this.

Seeking to convert a family problem into anational issue and misusing Parliament for familyinterests is the biggest threat to democracy andCongress party should take responsibility for this.

Having been reduced to a miniscule minori-ty in the Lok Sabha, Congress is obstructing legisla-tive business in the Rajya Sabha using its numbers.

Page 68: What National Herald case all about

66

Is this not a threat to democracy?

Out of frustration over steadily decliningpolitical space and adverse judicial pronouncementand unable to accept people's mandate to ModiGovernment, Congress is taking the Parliament to aransom. This is clear case of vendetta politics.

Looking for excuses to stall Parliament andpreventing major legislations like GST Bill is a clearcase of vendetta politics. Can Congress deny this?

Today, quoting an important leader mediareported that some top Congress Leader is againstpassing GST Bill, whose original author was theCongress Party. This is a clear case of vendetta pol-itics.

Congress Party wants to take revengeagainst the people of the country for giving absolutemajority to a single party in the Lok Sabha and thattoo for Modi Government. Congress Party is keen topay it back to the people by stopping all progressiveand development oriented legislations. This is againa clear evidence of vendetta politics.

Page 69: What National Herald case all about

67

But the best way to address these issues isthe forum of the court and not the Parliament.Obstructing Parliament for something related tojudicial system is nothing but vendetta politics.

Its amazing that Shri Rahul Gandhi says thatnobody can stop him from questioning the government. Who has stopped him from doing so?Students of a Bengaluru college have answered himenough.

People of the country are wise enough tounderstand the desperate politics of Congress Partyand their consequences.

Congress Leaders should realize that theirparty is preventing over 500 other MPs from raisingquestions and issues in both the Houses ofParliament.

Congress Party has been resorting to deni-grating the institution of Prime Minister by raisingslogans against Shri Modi besides making uncharita-ble comments.

Congress Party raised the issues of intolerance and conversions in the Parliament andended up being cornered.

Page 70: What National Herald case all about

68

In politics one needs to be patient and waitfor the opportunity while trying to resonate the willand aspirations of the people. Instead of doing so,Congress is acting in haste just to defend the interest of individuals. This is where the fundamental threat to democracy emanates from.

So nobody is able to understand or statewhy the Congress stalling the Parliament.

I appeal to the Congress Party not to furtherdisrupt the Parliament and cooperate in making thebest out of the remaining sittings in the larger interest of the people and the country.

Page 71: What National Herald case all about

69

‚¥¬ÊŒ∑§Ëÿ Ÿ¡Á⁄UÿÊ •¬ŸË ’ÊÃ

•÷Ë ŒÙ „çUà ¬„‹ Á¡Ÿ ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚Ë ŸÃÊ•Ù¥ Ÿ ‚¥ÁflœÊŸ ¬⁄U ’„‚ ∑‘§‚◊ÿ ©‚ ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ∑§Ë ŒŸ ’ÃÊà „È∞ ©‚∑§Ë ‚¥SÕÊ•Ù¥ ∑‘§ ¬˝Áà ‚ê◊ÊŸ ∑§Ë ‚Ëπ‚ûÊʬˇÊ ∑§Ù ŒË ÕË fl„Ë ŸÃÊ Á¬¿‹ ŒÙ ÁŒŸÙ¥ ‚ ‚¥‚Œ ∑§Ù Ÿ„Ë¥ ø‹Ÿ Œ ⁄U„„Ò¥– ‹ª÷ª vxÆ ‚Ê‹ ¬È⁄UÊŸË ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ¬Ê≈U˸ ∑§„Ë¥ ’ıÁh∑§ ¡«∏ÃÊ ∑§Ë Á‡Ê∑§Ê⁄U„ÙÃË ¡Ê ⁄U„Ë „Ò– ‡ÊÊÿŒ ©‚◊¥ ◊ÈgÙ¥ •ı⁄U ©Ÿ∑‘§ ¬˝Áà ‚◊Ê¡ ◊¥ •¬ÁˇÊì˝ÁÃÁ∑˝§ÿÊ ∑§Ë ‚◊¤Ê ÷Ë ∑§◊ „Ù ªß¸ „Ò– ÿ„ ‚◊¤Ê „Ë Á∑§‚Ë ⁄UÊ¡ŸËÁÃ∑§ ¬Ê≈U˸∑‘§ ¬˝‚Ê⁄U •ı⁄U ©‚∑§Ë Áfl‡fl‚ŸËÿÃÊ ∑§Ë ∑§‚ı≈UË „ÙÃË „Ò– Á¡Ÿ Œ‹Ù¥ ◊¥ ‡ÊË·¸SÃ⁄U ¬⁄U ¡Ÿ¡ËflŸ ‚ ∑§≈U ‹Ùª ¬Ê≈U˸ ∑‘§ ŸËÁÃ-ÁŸÿ¥ÃÊ ’Ÿ ¡Êà „Ò¥ ©Ÿ Œ‹Ù¥∑§Ë ‚◊¤Ê ‡ÊÊÿŒ •ı⁄U ˇÊËáÊ „Ù ¡ÊÃË „Ò– •Ê¡ ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ◊¥ ⁄UÊ¡ŸËÁÃ∑§ ‚ͤÊ-’ͤÊflÊ‹ ŒÍ⁄UŒ‡Ê˸ ⁄UáÊŸËÁÃ∑§Ê⁄UÙ¥ ∑§Ê ÁŸÃʥà •÷Êfl ÁŒπ ⁄U„Ê „Ò– øÍ¥Á∑§ ⁄UÊ¡ŸËÁà ◊¥¡Ÿ-SflË∑§Êÿ¸ÃÊ ¡Ÿ-‚¥Œ‡ÊÙ¥ ∑§Ê π‹ „Ò Á‹„Ê¡Ê „⁄U ¬Ê≈U˸ ŒÍ‚⁄UË ¬Ê≈U˸ ∑§Ëª‹ÁÃÿÙ¥ ∑§Ê »§ÊÿŒÊ ©ΔÃË „Ò– ß‚∑‘§ ‚ÊÕ „Ë •¬Ÿ ‚ ∑§Ù߸ ª‹Ã ‚¥Œ‡Ê ŸŒŸ ∑§Ë ∑§ÙÁ‡Ê‡Ê ∑§⁄UÃË „Ò •ı⁄U ŒÍ‚⁄UË ¬Ê≈U˸ ∑§Ë ¿Ù≈UË ª‹ÃË ∑§Ù ’…∏Ê-ø…∏Ê ∑§⁄U¬‡Ê ∑§⁄UÃË „Ò, ‹Á∑§Ÿ ß‚∑‘§ ÷Ë ∑§È¿ ÁŸÿ◊ „Ùà „Ò¥– ÿÁŒ ß‚ ‹«∏Ê߸ ◊¥‚¥flÒœÊÁŸ∑§ ◊ÊãÿÃÊ•Ù¥ •ı⁄U ‹Ù∑§ÃÊ¥ÁòÊ∑§ ¬⁄U¥¬⁄UÊ•Ù¥ ∑§Ë •fl„‹ŸÊ „ÙÃË „Ò ÃÙ©‚ ¬Ê≈U˸ ÿÊ ©‚∑‘§ ŸÃÊ ‚ ¡ŸÃÊ ◊È¥„ ◊Ù«∏Ÿ ‹ªÃË „Ò–

Ÿ‡ÊŸ‹ „⁄UÊÀ« ◊Ê◊‹ ¬⁄U ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ŸÃÎàfl ¡Ò‚Ë ¬˝ÁÃÁ∑˝§ÿÊ √ÿÄç ∑§⁄U⁄U„Ê „Ò ©‚‚ ÿ„Ë Á‚h „ÙÃÊ „Ò Á∑§ ß‚ ¬Ê≈U˸ ∑§Ë ‚◊¤Ê ∑§È¿ ∞‚ ŸÃÊ•Ù¥ ∑‘§

∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ∑§Ë •Êà◊ÉÊÊÃË ⁄UáÊŸËÁÃPublish Date:Thu, 10 Dec 2015 12:50 AM (IST)

Page 72: What National Herald case all about

70

’Ëø Á‚◊≈U ªß¸ „Ò Á¡Ÿ∑§Ê ¡Ÿ¡ËflŸ ∞‚Ë ∑§◊⁄UÙ¥ ‚ ’Ê„⁄U Ÿ„Ë¥ •ÊÿÊ „Ò– Ã÷ËÃÙ „Ê߸∑§Ù≈U¸ mÊ⁄UÊ •¬Ë‹ πÊÁ⁄U¡ „ÙŸ ∑‘§ ’ÊŒ ¬Ê≈U˸ ∑‘§ ‡ÊË·¸ ‹Ùª ⁄UÊà ÷⁄U⁄UáÊŸËÁà ’ŸÊà ⁄U„ •ı⁄U ÁŸ∑§‹Ê ∞∑§ ÁŸ„Êÿà ’„ÍŒÊ •ı⁄U ¬Ê≈U˸ ∑‘§ Á‹∞ ÉÊÊÃ∑§∑§Œ◊– ¬Ê≈U˸ ŸÃÎàfl •ŒÊ‹Ã ∑‘§ »Ò§‚‹ ∑§Ù ¬˝ÁÇÊÙœ ∑§Ë ⁄UÊ¡ŸËÁà ’ÃÊ ⁄U„Ê „Ò–¬Í⁄UË ŒÈÁŸÿÊ ◊¥ ∞∑§ SÕÊÁ¬Ã ‹Ù∑§ Á‚hʥà „Ò Á∑§ •ª⁄U •Ê¬ ¬⁄U ∑§Ù߸ •Ê⁄UÙ¬‹ª ÃÙ ¬„‹ ©‚ Ã∑§ÙZ ∑‘§ •ÊœÊ⁄U ¬⁄U ª‹Ã Á‚h ∑§⁄Uà „Ò¥ •ı⁄U Á»§⁄U •ª⁄U¡M§⁄Uà ¬«∏ ÃÙ ª‹Ã •Ê⁄U٬٥ ∑‘§ ‚ÍòÊœÊ⁄UÙ¥ ∑‘§ ŸÊ◊ ’ÃÊà „Ò¥, ‹Á∑§Ÿ ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ∑‘§◊„ÊŸ ⁄UáÊŸËÁÃ∑§Ê⁄UÙ¥ Ÿ ⁄UÊà ÷⁄U ¡ª ∑§⁄U ß‚∑‘§ ©‹≈U ¬„‹ ‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄U ∑§Ë ◊¥‡ÊÊ ∑§Ù∑§Ù‚Ê, Á»§⁄U ãÿÊÿ¬ÊÁ‹∑§Ê ¬⁄U ¬⁄UÙˇÊ M§¬ ‚ •Ê⁄UÙ¬ øS¬Ê Á∑§ÿÊ– ß‚∑‘§ ’ÊŒ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚Ë ‚Ê¥‚ŒÙ¥ Ÿ ‚¥‚Œ ∑§Ê ∑§Ê◊-∑§Ê¡ Δ¬ Á∑§ÿÊ– Ÿ‡ÊŸ‹ „⁄UÊÀ« ‚ ‚¥’¥ÁœÃ◊È∑§Œ◊ ∑§Ë ÃÒÿÊ⁄UË ∑§Ê •Ê‹◊ ÿ„ „Ò Á∑§ „Ê߸∑§Ù≈U¸ ‚ •¬Ë‹ πÊÁ⁄U¡ „ÙŸ ∑‘§’ÊŒ ÁŸø‹Ë •ŒÊ‹Ã ◊¥ ¡’ ◊≈˛Ù¬ÙÁ‹≈UŸ ◊Á¡S≈˛≈U Ÿ „Ê߸∑§Ù≈U¸ ∑‘§ •Ê«¸⁄U ∑§Ë¬˝ÁÃÁ‹Á¬ øÊ„Ë ÃÙ fl„ ’øÊfl ¬ˇÊ ∑‘§ ¬Ê‚ Ÿ„Ë¥ ÕË– ©‚ ÷Ë ©¬‹éœ ∑§⁄UÊÿÊÃÙ •Ê⁄UÙ¬∑§Ãʸ ‚È’˝◊áÿ◊ SflÊ◊Ë Ÿ–

Ÿ‡ÊŸ‹ „⁄UÊÀ« ◊Ê◊‹Ê ãÿÊÿ¬ÊÁ‹∑§Ê ∑‘§ ‚◊ˇÊ „Ò– ≈˛Êÿ‹ ∑§Ù≈U¸ Ÿ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ •äÿˇÊ-©¬ÊäÿˇÊ ‚ÙÁŸÿÊ-⁄UÊ„È‹ ‚◊à ÃËŸ •ãÿ ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚Ë ŸÃÊ•Ù¥ ∑§Ùß‚ •ÊœÊ⁄U ¬⁄U •ŒÊ‹Ã ◊¥ ©¬ÁSÕà „ÙŸ ∑§Ê ‚ê◊Ÿ ÷¡Ê „Ò Á∑§ fl ÿ¥ª ߥÁ«ÿ¥‚◊¥ ¬˝◊Èπ ‡Êÿ⁄U„ÙÀ«‚¸ „Ò¥– ©Ÿ ¬⁄U •Ê⁄UÙ¬ „Ò Á∑§ ©ã„Ù¥Ÿ ∞¡ Á‹Á◊≈U« ∑‘§ ∞∑§„¡Ê⁄U ‚ íÿÊŒÊ ‡Êÿ⁄UœÊ⁄U∑§Ù¥ ‚ ¬Í¿ Á’ŸÊ ‚Ê⁄U ‡Êÿ⁄U ‚ÙÁŸÿÊ-⁄UÊ„È‹ (ŒÙŸÙ¥ ∑‘§∑§È‹ |{ ¬˝ÁÇÊà ‡Êÿ⁄U) flÊ‹Ë ∑§¥¬ŸË ÿ¥ª ߥÁ«ÿ¥‚ ∑§Ù Œ ÁŒ∞– ∞¡ Á‹Á◊≈U«∑§Ë •ø‹ ‚¥¬ÁûÊ ◊¥ ÁŒÑË ∑‘§ ’„ÊŒÈ⁄U ‡ÊÊ„ ¡»§⁄U ◊ʪ¸ ÁSÕà „⁄UÊÀ« „Ê©‚ •ı⁄U‹πŸ™§ ∑‘§ ∑Ò§‚⁄U’ʪ ÁSÕà Ÿ„M§ ÷flŸ •ı⁄U ©‚∑‘§ ’ª‹ ∑§Ë ¡◊ËŸ „Ò– ™§¬⁄UË•ŒÊ‹Ã ◊¥ •¬Ë‹ ∑§⁄UŸÊ „⁄U √ÿÁQ§ ÿÊ ‚¥SÕÊ ∑§Ê •Áœ∑§Ê⁄U „Ò– ‚ÙÁŸÿÊ-⁄UÊ„È‹•ı⁄U •ãÿ ŸÃÊ•Ù¥ Ÿ ÁŒÀ‹Ë „Ê߸∑§Ù≈U¸ ◊¥ ©¬ÁSÕÁà ∑‘§ •ÊŒ‡Ê ∑‘§ Áπ‹Ê»§•¬Ë‹ ∑§Ë, ‹Á∑§Ÿ fl„ πÊÁ⁄U¡ „Ù ªß¸– „Ê߸∑§Ù≈U¸ Ÿ ∑‘§‚ ∑§Ë ◊Á⁄U≈U ◊¥ Ÿ ¡ÊÃ

Page 73: What National Herald case all about

71

„È∞ ÷Ë •¬Ë‹ πÊÁ⁄U¡ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑§Ê ∑§Ê⁄UáÊ ’ÃÊà „È∞ ◊Ê◊‹ ◊¥ •Ê¬⁄UÊÁœ∑§ Ãàfl„ÙŸ ∑§Ë ’Êà ∑§„Ë– ŸÊ⁄UÊ¡ ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ Ÿ ¬Í⁄U ÁŒŸ ‚¥‚Œ Ÿ„Ë¥ ø‹Ÿ ŒË– ‹Ù∑§‚÷Ê◊¥ ¬Ê¥ø ’Ê⁄U •ı⁄U ⁄UÊíÿ‚÷Ê ◊¥ ÃËŸ ’Ê⁄U √ÿflœÊŸ ¬ÒŒÊ Á∑§ÿÊ ªÿÊ– ŸÃˡ߬Í⁄UÊ ÁŒŸ ∑§Ê◊∑§Ê¡ ’ÊÁœÃ ⁄U„Ê– ’ªÒ⁄U ÿ„ ’ÃÊ∞ „È∞ Á∑§ ŸÊ⁄UÊ¡ªË Á∑§‚ ’Êì⁄U „Ò ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ Ÿ ‚¥‚Œ ◊¥ „¥ªÊ◊Ê Á∑§ÿÊ– ÿ„Ë ∑§Ê◊ ŒÍ‚⁄U ÁŒŸ ÷Ë Á∑§ÿÊ ªÿÊ–ÄUÿÊ ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ß‚ ’ÈÁŸÿÊŒË ’Êà ∑§Ù Ÿ„Ë¥ ‚◊¤Ê ¬Ê ⁄U„Ë „Ò Á∑§ •ŒÊ‹Ã ∑§Ë∑§Ê⁄U¸flÊ߸ ∑§Ù ‹∑§⁄U ‚¥‚Œ ∑§Ù ∑Ò§‚ ’ÊÁœÃ Á∑§ÿÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „Ò ÿÊ ‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄U ¬⁄U’Œ‹ ∑§Ë ⁄UÊ¡ŸËÁà ∑§Ê •Ê⁄UÙ¬ ∑Ò§‚ ‹ªÊÿÊ ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ „Ò?

äÿÊŸ ⁄U„ Á∑§ ≈˛Êÿ‹ ∑§Ù≈U¸ ∑‘§ ’ÊŒ ÁŒÀ‹Ë „Ê߸∑§Ù≈U¸ Ÿ ÷Ë √ÿÁÄêé¬ÁSÕÁà ‚ ⁄UÊ„Ã ∑§Ë •¬Ë‹ Ÿ ∑‘§fl‹ πÊÁ⁄U¡ ∑§Ë, ’ÁÀ∑§ ◊Ê◊‹ ◊¥•Ê¬⁄UÊÁœ∑§ •¥‡Ê ∑§Ë ’Êà ÷Ë ∑§„Ë– ÄUÿÊ ßÃŸË ¬È⁄UÊŸË ¬Ê≈U˸ ‚, ¡Ù {z ‚Ê‹◊¥ ÃËŸ øıÕÊ߸ ‚ íÿÊŒÊ ∑§Ê‹ Ã∑§ ‡ÊÊ‚Ÿ ◊¥ ⁄U„Ë „Ù ©‚‚ ÿ„ ©ê◊ËŒ ∑§Ë ¡Ê‚∑§ÃË „Ò Á∑§ fl„ ãÿÊÿ¬ÊÁ‹∑§Ê ∑§Ù ⁄UÊ¡ŸËÁÃ∑§ Ãfl ¬⁄U ‚¥∑‘§ •ı⁄U fl„ ÷Ë ’ªÒ⁄UÁ∑§‚Ë •ÊœÊ⁄U ∑‘§? ÄUÿÊ ÿ„ ◊Ê◊‹Ê ‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄U ‹«∏ ⁄U„Ë „Ò? ÄUÿÊ ‚È’˝◊áÿ◊SflÊ◊Ë ∑§Ù ÿ„ •Áœ∑§Ê⁄U Ÿ„Ë¥ „Ò Á∑§ √ÿÁQ§ •ı⁄U fl∑§Ë‹ ∑‘§ M§¬ ◊¥ ß‚ ◊Ê◊‹∑§Ù ãÿÊÿ¬ÊÁ‹∑§Ê ∑‘§ ¬Ê‚ ‹ ¡Ê∞¥? ∞∑§ ˇÊáÊ ∑‘§ Á‹∞ ◊ÊŸ ‹¥ Á∑§ ÷Ê¡¬Ê ∞‚Ê∑§⁄U ⁄U„Ë „Ò ÃÙ ÄUÿÊ ÿ„ ªÒ⁄U ∑§ÊŸÍŸË „Ò? •ÊÁπ⁄U Á∑§‚ •ÊœÊ⁄U ¬⁄U ÿ„ ∑§„Ê ¡Ê‚∑§ÃÊ „Ò Á∑§ •ŒÊ‹Ã ∑§Ê »Ò§‚‹Ê ⁄UÊ¡ŸËÁÃ∑§ ¬˝ÁÇÊÙœ ∑§Ê ¬˝Áû§‹ „Ò?‚ÙÁŸÿÊ ªÊ¥œË ∑‘§ ‚‹Ê„∑§Ê⁄UÙ¥ Ÿ ŒÙ ª¥÷Ë⁄U ª‹ÁÃÿÊ¥ ∑§Ë– ¬„‹Ë, ãÿÊÿ¬ÊÁ‹∑§Ê∑§Ë ªÁ⁄U◊Ê Áª⁄UÊŸ ∑§Ë ∑§ÙÁ‡Ê‡Ê ∑§Ë– ŒÍ‚⁄UË, ‚¥‚Œ ◊¥ √ÿflœÊŸ ∑§Ê •ıÁøàÿ ŸÁ‚h ∑§⁄U∑‘§ ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ∑§Ù ¡ŸÃÊ ∑§Ë Ÿ¡⁄UÙ¥ ◊¥ Áª⁄UÊÿÊ– •ª⁄U ‚ÙÁŸÿÊ-⁄UÊ„È‹ÁŸø‹Ë •ŒÊ‹Ã ∑‘§ Áπ‹Ê»§ •¬Ë‹ ∑§⁄UŸ •ı⁄U „Ê⁄U ¡ÊŸ ∑‘§ ’ÊŒ ‚¥‚Œ ◊¥√ÿflœÊŸ ∑§Ë ¡ª„ •ŒÊ‹ÃË »Ò§‚‹ ∑‘§ ¬˝Áà ‚ê◊ÊŸ ∑§Ê ÷Êfl ¬˝ŒÁ‡Ê¸Ã ∑§⁄UÄÈ∞ øȬøʬ •ŒÊ‹Ã ¬„È¥øà ÃÙ ‡ÊÊÿŒ ¡Ÿ-‚◊Õ¸Ÿ •ı⁄U ‚„ÊŸÈ÷ÍÁà ©Ÿ∑‘§ ¬ˇÊ◊¥ „ÙÃË– ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ •äÿˇÊ Ÿ •ŒÊ‹Ã ∑§Ê ‚ê◊ÊŸ ∑§⁄UŸ ∑‘§ ’¡Êÿ ÿ„ ∑§„Ê Á∑§

Page 74: What National Herald case all about

72

fl„ ߥÁŒ⁄UÊ ∑§Ë ’„Í „Ò¥ •ı⁄U Á∑§‚Ë ‚ «⁄U¥ªË Ÿ„Ë¥– ‚ÙÁŸÿÊ ∑§Ù ÿÊŒ ∑§⁄UŸÊ øÊÁ„∞Á∑§ ߥÁŒ⁄UÊ •ŒÊ‹Ã ∑§Ê ‚ê◊ÊŸ ∑§⁄Uà „È∞ ©‚∑‘§ ‚◊ˇÊ „ÊÁ¡⁄U „ÈßZ •ı⁄U ©‚‚©¬¡Ê ¡Ÿ‚◊Õ¸Ÿ ÷Ë ©ã„¥ Á»§⁄U ‚ûÊÊ ◊¥ ‹ÊŸ ◊¥ ‚„Êÿ∑§ ’ŸÊ– ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ∑§Ù ÿ„÷Ë ÿÊŒ ⁄UπŸÊ øÊÁ„∞ Á∑§ v~|z •ı⁄U wÆvz ◊¥ ’„Èà •¥Ã⁄U „Ò– ◊ËÁ«ÿÊ ¬‹¬‹∑§Ë π’⁄U ÁŒπÊ ∑§⁄U ¡ŸøÃŸÊ ◊¥ √ÿʬ∑§ ’Œ‹Êfl ∑§⁄U øÈ∑§Ê „Ò– •’ •Ê◊¡ŸÃÊ ∑§Ù ¬ÃÊ „Ò Á∑§ ÷˝CÊøÊ⁄U ∑‘§ ◊Ê◊‹ ◊¥ •ª⁄U Œ‡Ê ∑§Ë ÁŸø‹Ë •ŒÊ‹Ã◊ÊòÊ √ÿÁQ§ªÃ ©¬ÁSÕÁà ∑§Ê ‚ê◊Ÿ ¡Ê⁄UË ∑§⁄U •ı⁄U „Ê߸∑§Ù≈U¸ ©‚∑‘§ Áπ‹Ê»§•Ê⁄UÙ¬Ë ∑§Ë •¬Ë‹ ∑§Ù ‚Åà ‹çU¡Ù¥¥ ◊¥ πÊÁ⁄U¡ ∑§⁄Uà „È∞ ∑§„ Á∑§ ◊Ê◊‹ ◊¥•Ê¬⁄UÊÁœ∑§ Ãàfl ÁŒπÊ߸ ŒÃ „Ò¥ ÃÙ ©‚ ⁄UÊ¡ŸËÁÃ∑§ ¬˝ÁÇÊÙœ ∑§„∑§⁄U ’øÊfl∑§⁄UŸÊ ãÿÊÿ¬ÊÁ‹∑§Ê ∑§Ë •fl◊ÊŸŸÊ „Ò–

∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ∑§Ê Ã∑§¸ ¬˝÷Êfl «Ê‹ ‚∑§ÃÊ ÕÊ •ª⁄U fl„ •ŒÊ‹Ã ∑‘§ »Ò§‚‹∑§Ù ◊ÊŸŸ ∑‘§ ’ÊŒ ¡ŸÃÊ Ã∑§ •¬ŸË ’Êà ÃÊÁ∑§¸∑§ M§¬ ‚ ¬„È¥øÊÃË– ÿÁŒ ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚‚¥‚Œ ◊¥ „¥ªÊ◊Ê ¡Ê⁄UË ⁄Uπà „È∞ ¡Ë∞‚≈UË Áflœÿ∑§ ¬Ê‚ Ÿ„Ë¥ „ÙŸ ŒÃË „Ò ÃÙ¡ŸÃÊ ∑§Ù ÿ„Ë ‚¥Œ‡Ê ¡Ê∞ªÊ Á∑§ •¬Ÿ ŸÃÊ•Ù¥ ∑§Ù •ŒÊ‹ÃË ‚¥∑§≈U ‚ ©’Ê⁄UŸ∑‘§ Á‹∞ ÿ„ ¬Ê≈U˸ ¡Ÿ-∑§ÀÿÊáÊ ∑§Ë ’Á‹ ‹∑§⁄U ‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄U ¬⁄U •ŸÒÁÃ∑§ Œ’Êfl’ŸÊ ⁄U„Ë „Ò–

(‹π∑§ ∞Ÿ∑‘§ Á‚¥„, ⁄UÊ¡ŸËÁÃ∑§ Áfl‡‹·∑§ ∞fl¥ ’˝Ê«∑§ÊÚS≈U ∞Á«≈U‚¸ ∞‚ÙÁ‚∞‡ÊŸ ∑‘§ ◊„Ê‚Áøfl „Ò¥)

Page 75: What National Herald case all about

∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ Ÿ Ÿ‡ÊŸ‹ „⁄UÊÀ« ◊Ê◊‹ ∑§Ë ¬ÎD÷ÍÁ◊ ◊¥ ’ÈœflÊ⁄U ∑§Ù ŒÍ‚⁄U

ÁŒŸ ‹ªÊÃÊ⁄U ‹Ù∑§‚÷Ê ◊¥ ÷Ê⁄UË „¥ªÊ◊Ê Á∑§ÿÊ– ‹Á∑§Ÿ ‚ûÊÊ ¬ˇÊ Ÿ ©‚∑‘§

Áfl⁄UÙœ ∑§Ù Ÿ¡⁄U•¥ŒÊ¡ ∑§⁄Uà „È∞ ‡ÊÙ⁄U‡Ê⁄UÊ’ ∑‘§ ’Ëø „Ë ‚ŒŸ ∑§Ë ∑§Êÿ¸flÊ„Ë

ø‹Ê߸ •ı⁄U ÁŒŸ ∑‘§ ‚ÍøË’h ‚÷Ë ∑§Ê◊∑§Ê¡ ∑§Ù ÁŸ¬≈UÊÿÊ– ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ∑§Ù

„Ê‹Ê¥Á∑§ ÃÎáÊ◊Í‹ ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ∑‘§ M§¬ ◊¥ ∞∑§ ‚◊Õ¸∑§ Œ‹ Á◊‹Ê– ‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄U Ÿ

¬‹≈UflÊ⁄U ÷Ë Á∑§ÿÊ Á∑§ ◊ÈÅÿ Áfl¬ˇÊË Œ‹ Ÿ‡ÊŸ‹ „⁄UÊÀ« ◊Ê◊‹ ◊¥

ãÿÊÿ¬ÊÁ‹∑§Ê ∑§Ù øÃÊflŸË ŒŸ ∑‘§ Á‹∞ ‚¥‚Œ ∑§Ê ßSÃ◊Ê‹ ∑§⁄U ⁄U„Ê „Ò– ‚ŒŸ

∑§Ë ∑§Êÿ¸flÊ„Ë ‡ÊÈM§ „ÙŸ ‚ ‹∑§⁄U ‚◊Ê# „ÙŸ Ã∑§ ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚Ë ‚ŒSÿ •Ê‚Ÿ ∑‘§

‚◊ˇÊ π«∏ „Ù∑§⁄U ŸÊ⁄U’Ê¡Ë ∑§⁄Uà ⁄U„– ‹Á∑§Ÿ •äÿˇÊ ‚ÈÁ◊òÊÊ ◊„Ê¡Ÿ Ÿ

„¥ªÊ◊ ∑‘§ ’Ëø „Ë ¬˝‡Ÿ∑§Ê‹ •ı⁄U ‡ÊÍãÿ∑§Ê‹ ø‹ÊÿÊ– ÷Ù¡ŸÊfl∑§Ê‡Ê ∑‘§ ’ÊŒ

„¥ªÊ◊ ∑‘§ ’Ëø „Ë ©¬ÊäÿˇÊ ∞◊ Õ¥’ËŒÈ⁄UÒ Ÿ Ÿ ∑‘§fl‹ ∞∑§ Áflœÿ∑§ ∑§Ù ¬ÊÁ⁄UÃ

∑§⁄UÊÿÊ ’ÁÀ∑§ Œ‡Ê ◊¥ ‚Íπ ∑§Ë ÁSÕÁà ¬⁄U •œÍ⁄UË øøʸ ∑§Ù ÷Ë •Êª ’…∏flÊÿÊ–

„¥ªÊ◊ ∑‘§ ø‹Ã ∞∑§ ’Ê⁄U ÷Ë ‚ŒŸ ∑§Ë ∑§Êÿ¸flÊ„Ë SÕÁªÃ Ÿ„Ë¥ ∑§Ë ªß¸– ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚

∑‘§ ŸÃÊ ◊ÁÑ∑§Ê¡È¸Ÿ π⁄Uª Ÿ •Ê⁄UÙ¬ ‹ªÊÿÊ Á∑§ Œ‡Ê ◊¥ ŒÙ Ã⁄U„ ∑‘§ ∑§ÊŸÍŸ „Ò¥–

∞∑§ ∑§ÊŸÍŸ Áfl¬ˇÊ ∑‘§ Á‹∞ •ı⁄U ∞∑§ ∑§ÊŸÍŸ ß‚ Œ‡Ê ∑§Ë ‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄U ∑‘§ Á‹∞ „Ò–

©ã„Ù¥Ÿ ‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄U ¬⁄U •Ê⁄UÙ¬ ‹ªÊÿÊ Á∑§ fl„ Áfl¬ˇÊ ¬⁄U Œ◊Ÿ ∑§Ë ŸËÁà •ı⁄U ’Œ‹

∑§Ë ÷ÊflŸÊ •¬ŸÊ ⁄U„Ë „Ò •ı⁄U Áfl¬ˇÊ ∑‘§ ŸÃÊ•Ù¥ ∑§Ù ‚ÃÊÿÊ ¡Ê ⁄U„Ê „Ò– ©ã„¥

«⁄UÊŸ ∑§Ë ∑§ÙÁ‡Ê‡Ê ∑§Ë ¡Ê ⁄U„Ë „Ò– ‚ŒŸ ◊¥ √ÿflSÕÊ Ÿ„Ë¥ „ÙŸ ∑‘§ ’Êfl¡ÍŒ

73

„⁄UÊÀ« ◊Ê◊‹ ◊¥ ‹Ù∑§‚÷Ê ◊¥ Á»§⁄U „¥ªÊ◊Ê,‡ÊÙ⁄U‡Ê⁄UÊ’ ∑‘§ ’Ëø ø‹Ê ∑§Ê◊∑§Ê¡

December 10, 2015

Page 76: What National Herald case all about

74

‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄U Áflœÿ∑§ ¬ÊÁ⁄Uà ∑§⁄UÊŸ ‚Á„à ‚ŒŸ ∑§Ë ∑§Êÿ¸‚ÍøË ∑‘§ ∞¡¥« ∑§Ù •Êª

’…∏Ê ∑§⁄U Áfl¬ˇÊ ∑§Ê ª‹Ê ÉÊÙ¥≈UŸ ∑§Ê ¬˝ÿÊ‚ ∑§⁄U ⁄U„Ë „Ò– ‚¥‚ŒËÿ ∑§Êÿ¸ ◊¥òÊË

∞◊ fl¥∑Ò§ÿÊ ŸÊÿ«Í Ÿ Áfl¬ˇÊ ∑‘§ •Ê⁄U٬٥ ∑§Ù Ÿ∑§Ê⁄Uà „È∞ ©‹≈U ◊ÈÅÿ Áfl¬ˇÊË

Œ‹ ¬⁄U ÃʟʇÊÊ„Ë ¬Íáʸ ⁄UflÒÿÊ •¬ŸÊŸ ∑§Ê •Ê⁄UÙ¬ ‹ªÊÿÊ– ©ã„Ù¥Ÿ ∑§„Ê Á∑§

◊¥ª‹flÊ⁄U ∑§Ù ‚Íπ ¡Ò‚ ◊„ûʘfl¬Íáʸ Áfl·ÿ ¬⁄U ©ã„Ù¥Ÿ øøʸ Ÿ„Ë¥ „ÙŸ ŒË– Œ‚

¬¥Œ˝„ ‹Ùª •Ê‚Ÿ ∑‘§ ÁŸ∑§≈U π«∏ „Ù∑§⁄U ‚ŒŸ ∑§Ù ø‹Ÿ Ÿ„Ë¥ Œ ⁄U„ „Ò¥–

‡ÊÍãÿ∑§Ê‹ ◊¥ ÃÎáÊ◊Í‹ ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ∑‘§ ‚ıªÃ ⁄UÊÿ Ÿ π«∏ª ∑§Ë ’ÊÃÙ¥ ∑§Ê ‚◊Õ¸Ÿ

∑§⁄Uà „È∞ ∑§„Ê Á∑§ fl ©Ÿ∑§Ë ’ÊÃÙ¥ ‚ ¬Í⁄UË Ã⁄U„ ‚„◊à „Ò¥ Á∑§ ‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄U ’Œ‹

∑§Ë ÷ÊflŸÊ ‚ ∑§Ê◊ ∑§⁄U ⁄U„Ë „Ò fl ¬˝œÊŸ◊¥òÊË ∑§Ù ß‚ ¬⁄U ¡flÊ’ ŒŸÊ øÊÁ„∞–

‹Ù∑§‚÷Ê •äÿˇÊ mÊ⁄UÊ ’Ù‹Ÿ ∑§Ë •ŸÈ◊Áà Ÿ„Ë¥ ÁŒ∞ ¡ÊŸ ¬⁄U ÃÎáÊ◊Í‹ ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚

‚ŒSÿ ‚ŒŸ ‚ flÊ∑§•Ê©≈U ∑§⁄U ª∞– ©œ⁄U ŸÊÿ«Í Ÿ ∑§„Ê Á∑§ Áfl¬ˇÊË ‚ŒSÿÙ¥

∑‘§ ¬Ê‚ ∑§Ù߸ Ãâÿ Ÿ„Ë¥ „Ò– ÿ„ ∑§Ù≈U¸ ∑‘§ •ÊŒ‡Ê ∑§Ê ¬Ê‹Ÿ ∑§⁄UŸÊ Ÿ„Ë¥ øÊ„Ã

„Ò¥– ∞∑§ ãÿÊÁÿ∑§ •ÊŒ‡Ê •ÊÿÊ „Ò– •Ê¬ ‚¥‚Œ ∑‘§ ¡Á⁄U∞ ãÿÊÿ¬ÊÁ‹∑§Ê ∑§Ù

øÃÊflŸË Œ ⁄U„ „Ò¥– ÿ„ ⁄UÊC˝ Á„à ◊¥ Ÿ„Ë¥ „Ò– ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ŸÃÊ π⁄Uª Ÿ ∑§„Ê-„◊

ß‚Á‹∞ Áfl⁄UÙœ ∑§⁄U ⁄U„ „Ò¥ Á∑§ Œ‡Ê ◊¥ ŒÙ Ã⁄U„ ∑§Ê ∑§ÊŸÍŸ „Ò– „◊ ãÿÊÿʬÊÁ‹∑§Ê

∑‘§ Áπ‹Ê»§ Ÿ„Ë¥ „Ò¥ „◊ ‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄U ∑§Ë ŸËÿà ∑‘§ Áπ‹Ê»§ Áfl⁄UÙœ ∑§⁄U ⁄U„ „Ò¥–

‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄U ¡Ù Œ◊Ÿ ∑§Ë ŸËÁà •¬ŸÊ ⁄U„Ë „Ò ©‚∑‘§ Áπ‹Ê»§ Áfl⁄UÙœ ∑§⁄U ⁄U„ „Ò¥–

π⁄Uª ¡’ •¬ŸË ’Êà ⁄Uπ ⁄U„ Õ ÃÙ ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ •äÿˇÊ ‚ÙÁŸÿÊ ªÊ¥œË •ı⁄U ¬Ê≈U˸

©¬ÊäÿˇÊ ⁄UÊ„È‹ ªÊ¥œË ‚ŒŸ ◊¥ ◊ı¡ÍŒ Õ– ‚ÙÁŸÿÊ ©ã„¥ ’Ëø ’Ëø ◊¥ ∑§È¿

‚ȤÊÊfl ÷Ë Œ ⁄U„Ë– ¬˝‡Ÿ∑§Ê‹ ◊¥ ß‚ „¥ªÊ◊ ∑‘§ flQ§ íÿÊŒÊÃ⁄U ‚◊ÿ ¬˝œÊŸ◊¥òÊË

‚ŒŸ ◊¥ ◊ı¡ÍŒ Õ– ÷Ù¡ŸÊfl∑§Ê‡Ê ∑‘§ ’ÊŒ ‚flÊ ŒÙ ’¡ ‚ŒŸ ∑§Ë ∑§Êÿ¸flÊ„Ë

Á»§⁄U ‚ ‡ÊÈM§ „ÙŸ ¬⁄U ÁflûÊ ⁄UÊíÿ ◊¥òÊË ¡ÿ¥Ã Á‚ã„Ê Ÿ ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚Ë ‚ŒSÿÙ¥ ∑§Ë

ŸÊ⁄U’Ê¡Ë ∑‘§ ’Ëø ÷Ê⁄UÃËÿ ãÿÊ‚ •ÁœÁŸÿ◊ v}}w ◊¥ ‚¥‡ÊÙœŸ ∑‘§ Á‹∞

Page 77: What National Herald case all about

75

Áflœÿ∑§ ¬‡Ê Á∑§ÿÊ– π⁄Uª Ÿ ß‚ ¬⁄U •Ê⁄UÙ¬ ‹ªÊÿÊ Á∑§ ‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄U Áfl¬ˇÊ ∑§Ù

Œ’Ê ⁄U„Ë „Ò, ª‹Ê ÉÊÙ¥≈U ⁄U„Ë „Ò •ı⁄U ©‚∑§Ê •¬◊ÊŸ ∑§⁄U ⁄U„Ë „Ò– ÿ„ ⁄UflÒÿÊ

ª‹Ã „Ò– „◊ •Ê¬∑§Ê ‚¥⁄UˇÊáÊ øÊ„Ã „Ò¥– Áflœÿ∑§ ¬ÊÁ⁄Uà Ÿ„Ë¥ „ÙŸÊ øÊÁ„∞–

ŸÊÿ«Í Ÿ ß‚‚ ¬Ífl¸ ∑§„Ê Á∑§ ‚¥‚Œ ◊¥ ∞‚ Ÿ„Ë¥ ø‹ ‚∑§ÃÊ ÄUÿÙ¥Á∑§ Œ‡Ê ∑§Ë

¡ŸÃÊ ÁflœÊÿË ∑§Ê◊∑§Ê¡ øÊ„ÃË „Ò– „Ê‹Ê¥Á∑§ „¥ªÊ◊ ◊¥ „Ë Áflœÿ∑§ ∑§Ù

äflÁŸ◊à ‚ ¬ÊÁ⁄Uà ∑§⁄U ÁŒÿÊ ªÿÊ •ı⁄U ß‚∑‘§ ’ÊŒ ‚ŒŸ Ÿ Œ‡Ê ◊¥ ‚Íπ ∑§Ë

ÁSÕÁà ¬⁄U •œÍ⁄UË øøʸ ∑§Ù •Êª ’…∏ÊÿÊ–

Page 78: What National Herald case all about

76

Ÿ‡ÊŸ‹ „⁄UÀ« ∑‘§ SflÊÁ◊àfl ◊Ê◊‹ ◊¥ ÁŒÀ‹Ë ∑§Ë ∞∑§ •ŒÊ‹Ã mÊ⁄UÊ‚ÙÁŸÿÊ ªÊ¥œË, ⁄UÊ„È‹ ªÊ¥œË •ı⁄U ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ∑‘§ •ãÿ ¬Ê¥ø ŸÃÊ•Ù¥ ∑‘§ Áπ‹Ê»§ ¡Ê⁄UË‚◊Ÿ ∑§Ù ‹∑§⁄U Á¡‚ Ã⁄U„ ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ Ÿ ‚¥‚Œ ◊¥ ‡ÊÙ⁄U ◊øÊÿÊ ©‚ Á∑§‚Ë ÷Ë M§¬◊¥ ‹Ù∑§ÃÊ¥ÁòÊ∑§ Ÿ„Ë¥ ∑§„Ê ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ– ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ∑§Ë Œ‹Ë‹ „Ò Á∑§ Ÿ⁄U¥Œ˝ ◊ٌ˂⁄U∑§Ê⁄U ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ¬⁄U ŒÈ÷ʸflŸÊ¬Íáʸ „◊‹ ∑§⁄U ⁄U„Ë „Ò– ß‚ ‹∑§⁄U ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚Ë ‚Ê¥‚ŒÙ¥Ÿ ŒÙ ÁŒŸ ‹Ù∑§‚÷Ê •ı⁄U ⁄UÊíÿ‚÷Ê ∑§Ë ∑§Êÿ¸flÊ„Ë ◊¥ ’ÊœÊ «Ê‹Ÿ ∑§Ê ¬˝ÿÊ‚Á∑§ÿÊ– ©Ÿ∑‘§ „¥ªÊ◊ ∑‘§ ø‹Ã ’ÈœflÊ⁄U ∑§Ù ‚ŒŸ ∑§Ê ∑§Ê◊∑§Ê¡ SÕÁªÃ ∑§⁄UŸÊ¬«∏Ê– ÿ„ ‚◊¤ÊŸÊ ◊ÈÁ‡∑§‹ „Ò Á∑§ ¡’ ◊Ê◊‹Ê •ŒÊ‹Ã ◊¥ „Ò, ß‚ ◊„ËŸ ∑§Ë©ÛÊË‚ ÃÊ⁄UËπ ∑§Ù ©‚ ¬⁄U ‚ÈŸflÊ߸ ◊È∑§⁄U¸⁄U „Ò, ÃÙ ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ∑‘§ ŸÃÊ ’Ëø ◊¥ ©‚•‹ª ◊Ù«∏ ŒŸ ∑§Ê ¬˝ÿÊ‚ ÄUÿÙ¥ ∑§⁄U ⁄U„ „Ò¥– ÄUÿÊ ß‚Á‹∞ Á∑§ Ÿ‡ÊŸ‹ „⁄UÀ«∑‘§ SflÊÁ◊àfl ∑§Ù ‹∑§⁄U „È߸ œÙπÊœ«∏Ë ‚ ¡È«∏ ◊Ê◊‹ ∑§Ù ∞∑§ ÷Ê¡¬Ê ŸÃÊ Ÿ•ŒÊ‹Ã ◊¥ ©ΔÊÿÊ, ß‚Á‹∞ ÷Ê¡¬Ê ¬⁄U •Ê⁄UÙ¬ ‹ªÊŸÊ ©‚ •Ê‚ÊŸ Ÿ¡⁄U •Ê⁄U„Ê „Ò! •ª⁄U ÿ„ ◊Ê◊‹Ê ‚ø◊Èø ’’ÈÁŸÿÊŒ „Ò •ı⁄U SflÊÁ◊àfl „SÃÊ¥Ã⁄UáÊ ‚¥’¥œË¬˝ÁR§ÿÊ ¬Í⁄UË Ã⁄U„ ∑§ÊŸÍŸË Ã⁄UË∑‘§ ‚ ‚¥¬ÛÊ „È߸ „Ò ÃÙ ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ∑§Ù ß‚ Ã⁄U„ ©ûÊÁ¡Ã„ÙŸ ∑§Ë ∑§Ù߸ fl¡„ Ÿ„Ë¥ „ÙŸË øÊÁ„∞– Ÿ‡ÊŸ‹ „⁄UÀ« ‡ÊÈM§ ‚ ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ∑§Ê◊Èπ¬òÊ ◊ÊŸÊ ¡ÊÃÊ ⁄U„Ê „Ò, ©‚∑§Ë SÕʬŸÊ ¡flÊ„⁄U‹Ê‹ Ÿ„M§ Ÿ ∑§Ë ÕË– ◊ª⁄UÁflûÊËÿ ‚¥∑§≈U ∑‘§ Œı⁄U ‚ ªÈ¡⁄UŸ ∑§Ë fl¡„ ‚ ∑§⁄UË’ ‚Êà ‚Ê‹ ¬„‹ ©‚ ’¥Œ∑§⁄U ÁŒÿÊ ªÿÊ ÕÊ– ©‚ ∑§¥¬ŸË ¬⁄U Ÿé’ ∑§⁄UÙ«∏ L§¬∞ ∑§Ë ŒŸŒÊ⁄UË ÕË– ©‚∑‘§’¥Œ „ÙŸ ∑‘§ ŒÙ ‚Ê‹ ’ÊŒ ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ •äÿˇÊ ‚ÙÁŸÿÊ ªÊ¥œË •ı⁄U ©¬ÊäÿˇÊ ⁄UÊ„È‹ªÊ¥œË ‚◊à ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ∑‘§ ¬Ê¥ø •ãÿ ŸÃÊ•Ù¥ Ÿ ∞∑§ Ÿß¸ ∑§¥¬ŸË ’ŸÊ ∑§⁄U Ÿ‡ÊŸ‹

SflÊÁ◊àfl •ı⁄U Á‚ÿÊ‚Ã◊Èπ¬ÎD ‚¥¬ÊŒ∑§Ëÿ | December 10, 2015

Page 79: What National Herald case all about

77

„⁄UÀ« ∑§Ê SflÊÁ◊àfl „SÃÊ¥ÃÁ⁄Uà ∑§⁄U Á‹ÿÊ– ©‚∑§Ë ŒŸŒÊÁ⁄UÿÊ¥ øÈ∑§ÊŸ ∑‘§ Á‹∞∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ¬Ê≈U˸ Ÿ Ÿé’ ∑§⁄UÙ«∏ L§¬∞ ∑§¡¸ ∑‘§ M§¬ ◊¥ „SÃÊ¥Á⁄Uà Á∑§∞, ¡Ù ’ÊŒ ◊¥◊Ê»§ ∑§⁄U ÁŒ∞ ª∞– ß‚ Ã⁄U„ ∑§¥¬ŸË ∑‘§ „SÃÊ¥⁄UáÊ ∑§Ë ¬˝ÁR§ÿÊ ∑§Ù •ŒÊ‹Ã ◊¥øÈŸıÃË ŒË ªß¸– •’ ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ÷‹ •¬Ÿ ’øÊfl ◊¥ ÷Ê¡¬Ê ¬⁄U ŒÈ÷ʸflŸÊ ∑§Ê•Ê⁄UÙ¬ ‹ªÊ ⁄U„Ë „Ò, ¬⁄U ∑§È¿ ‚flÊ‹ •ŸÈûÊÁ⁄Uà „Ò¥, Á¡Ÿ∑§Ê ¡flÊ’ ÁŒ∞ Á’ŸÊ‚ÙÁŸÿÊ ªÊ¥œË •ı⁄U ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ¬Ê≈U˸ ’⁄UË Ÿ„Ë¥ ◊ÊŸ ¡Ê ‚∑§Ã– •ŒÊ‹Ã Ÿ ÷Ë ÿ„Ë¡ÊŸŸ ∑‘§ ◊∑§‚Œ ‚ Ÿß¸ ∑§¥¬ŸË ∑‘§ ‚÷Ë ‡Êÿ⁄UœÊ⁄U∑§Ù¥ ∑§Ù ©¬ÁSÕà „ÙŸ ∑§ÊŸÙÁ≈U‚ ÷¡Ê „Ò– •ª⁄U ÿ„ ◊Ê◊‹Ê ‚ø◊Èø ’’ÈÁŸÿÊŒ „ÙÃÊ ÃÙ ©ëø ãÿÊÿÊ‹ÿŸ ÁŸø‹Ë •ŒÊ‹Ã ∑‘§ ∑§Œ◊ ∑§Ù ©Áøà Ÿ Δ„⁄UÊÿÊ „ÙÃÊ– ¬„‹Ë ’Êà ÃÙ ÿ„ËÁ∑§ ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ¬Ê≈U˸ Ÿ •Ê◊ ‹ÙªÙ¥ ‚ ¡È≈UÊ∞ ø¥Œ ∑§Ù Á∑§‚ „ÒÁ‚ÿà ‚ •¬Ÿ „Ë•äÿˇÊ ∑§Ë ∞∑§ ∑§¥¬ŸË ∑§Ù ∑§¡¸ ∑‘§ M§¬ ◊¥ Œ ÁŒÿÊ •ı⁄U Á»§⁄U ©‚ ◊Ê»§ ∑§⁄UÁŒÿÊ ªÿÊ? ¡ÊÁ„⁄U „Ò, Ÿ‡ÊŸ‹ „⁄UÀ« ‚ ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ∑§Ê ÷ÊflŸÊà◊∑§ ¡È«∏Êfl „Ò, ¬⁄U©‚Ÿ ß‚ Ã⁄U„ ∞∑§ √ÿÊfl‚ÊÁÿ∑§ ∑§¥¬ŸË ∑§Ù ¬Ò‚ Á∑§‚ •Áœ∑§Ê⁄U ∑‘§ ‚ÊÕ„SÃÊ¥ÃÁ⁄Uà Á∑§∞? Á»§⁄U ÿ„ ÷Ë Á∑§ ¬øÊ‚ ‹Êπ L§¬∞ „ÒÁ‚ÿà flÊ‹Ë ∞∑§ ∑¢§¬ŸË∑§Ù ŒÙ „¡Ê⁄U ∑§⁄UÙ«∏ ∑§Ë ‚¥¬ÁûÊ flÊ‹Ë ∞∑§ ∑§¥¬ŸË ∑§Ê SflÊÁ◊àfl Á∑§‚ Ã⁄U„„SÃÊ¥ÃÁ⁄Uà ∑§⁄U ÁŒÿÊ ªÿÊ? •ª⁄U ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ∑‘§ ¬Ê‚ ߟ ‚flÊ‹Ù¥ ∑§Ê ‚¥ÃÙ·¡Ÿ∑§¡flÊ’ „Ò •ı⁄U ©‚Ÿ ∑§ÊŸÍŸŸ ‚„Ë ¬˝Á∑˝§ÿÊ •¬ŸÊ߸ „Ò, ÃÙ •ÊÁπ⁄U ©‚ •ŒÊ‹Ã∑‘§ ‚◊ˇÊ •¬ŸË Œ‹Ë‹¥ ŒŸ ∑‘§ ’¡Êÿ ‚¥‚Œ ◊¥ ß‚ ÁŸ¬≈UÊŸ ∑§Ë ÄUÿÙ¥ ¡M§⁄Uì«∏ ⁄U„Ë „Ò! ß‚ Ã⁄U„ ‚¥‚Œ ◊¥ ‡ÊÙ⁄U ◊øÊŸÊ ∞∑§ Ã⁄U„ ‚ •ŒÊ‹Ã ∑§Ë ∑§Êÿ¸flÊ„Ë◊¥ Œπ‹ ŒŸ ∑§Ê ◊Ê◊‹Ê ÷Ë ’ŸÃÊ „Ò– Á»§⁄U ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ∑§Ù •ª⁄U ‚ø◊Èø ∑§ÊŸÍŸ¬⁄U ÷⁄UÙ‚Ê „Ò, ‹Ù∑§ÃÊ¥ÁòÊ∑§ ◊ÍÀÿÙ¥ ¬⁄U ÿ∑§ËŸ „Ò ÃÙ ©‚∑§Ê ß‚ Ã⁄U„ ©ûÊÁ¡Ã„ÙŸÊ ¡Êÿ¡ Ÿ„Ë¥ ∑§„Ê ¡Ê ‚∑§ÃÊ–

Page 80: What National Herald case all about

78

Ÿ‡ÊŸ‹ „⁄UÊÀ« ∑‘§ ◊Èg ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ¬Ê≈U˸ ⁄UÊíÿ ‚÷Ê ◊¥ øøʸ ‚ ÷ʪ ⁄U„Ë „Ò¡’Á∑§ ‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄U ß‚ ◊Èg ¬⁄U øøʸ ∑‘§ Á‹∞ ÃÒÿÊ⁄U „Ò– ∑‘§ãŒ˝Ëÿ ‚ÍøŸÊ ∞fl¥ ¬˝ÙlıÁª∑§Ë◊¥òÊË ⁄UÁfl‡Ê¥∑§⁄U ¬˝‚ÊŒ Ÿ ªÈL§flÊ⁄U ∑§Ù ⁄UÊíÿ‚÷Ê ◊¥ ‡ÊÍãÿ∑§Ê‹ ∑‘§ Œı⁄UÊŸ ÿ„ •Ê⁄UÙ¬∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ¬⁄U ‹ªÊ∞–

Œ⁄U•‚‹, ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ∑‘§ ‚ŒSÿ ¡’ Ÿ‡ÊŸ‹ „⁄UÊÀ« ∑‘§ ◊Èg ¬⁄U „¥ªÊ◊Ê ∑§⁄UŸ‹ª, Ã’ ¬˝‚ÊŒ Ÿ •¬ŸË ‚Ë≈U ‚ Ã◊Ã◊Êà „È∞ ∑§„Ê, ““‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄U øøʸ ∑‘§ Á‹∞ ÃÒÿÊ⁄U„Ò– •÷Ë øøʸ ∑§⁄U ‹ËÁ¡∞– ‹Á∑§Ÿ •Ê¬ øøʸ ‚ ÄUÿÙ¥ ÷ʪ ⁄U„ „Ò¥ •ı⁄U ß‚ Ã⁄U„‚¥‚Œ ∑§Ë ªÁ⁄U◊Ê Áª⁄UÊ ⁄U„ „Ò¥– „◊ „⁄U ◊Èg ¬⁄U øøʸ ∑‘§ Á‹∞ ⁄UÊ¡Ë „Ò–””

⁄UÁfl‡Ê¥∑§⁄U ¬˝‚ÊŒ ∑‘§ ‚ÊÕ-‚ÊÕ ◊ÊŸfl ‚¥‚ÊœŸ Áfl∑§Ê‚ ◊¥òÊË S◊ÎÁà ߸⁄UÊŸË,∑‘§ãŒ˝Ëÿ SflÊSâÿ ◊¥òÊË ¡¬Ë ŸaÊ •ı⁄U •ãÿ ÷Ê¡¬Ê ÁflœÊÿ∑§Ù¥ Ÿ ÷Ë •¬ŸË ‚Ë≈U ¬⁄Uπ«∏ „Ù∑§⁄U ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ∑§Ë Ã⁄U»§ •Ê∑˝§Ê◊∑§ ◊ÈŒ˝Ê ◊¥ •Ê ª∞– Ã’ ©¬‚÷ʬÁà ¬Ë¡∑§ÈÁ⁄UÿŸ Ÿ ÷Ë ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚Ë ‚ŒSÿÙ¥ ‚ ∑§„Ê ¡’ ‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄U øøʸ ∑‘§ Á‹∞ ÃÒÿÊ⁄U „Ò¥ ÃÙ •Ê¬øøʸ ÄUÿÙ¥ Ÿ„Ë¥ ∑§⁄UÖ ©¬‚÷ʬÁà Ÿ ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ÁflœÊÿ∑§Ù¥ ‚ øøʸ ◊¥ ÷ʪ ‹Ÿ ∑§Ë•¬Ë‹ ÷Ë ∑§Ë ‹Á∑§Ÿ ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚Ë ‚ŒSÿ ‚÷ʬÁà ∑‘§ •Ê‚Ÿ ∑‘§ ¬Ê‚ „¥ªÊ◊Ê ∑§⁄Uà ⁄U„–

ß‚‚ ¬„‹ ∑‘§ãŒ˝Ëÿ SflÊSâÿ ◊¥òÊË ¡¬Ë ŸaÊ Ÿ ÷Ë ∑§„Ê Á∑§ ‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄U øøʸ∑‘§ Á‹∞ ÃÒÿÊ⁄U „Ò– ‹Á∑§Ÿ ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚ ‚ŒSÿÙ¥ Ÿ ©Ÿ∑§Ë ’Êà •Ÿ‚ÍøË ∑§⁄U ŒË– ©Ÿ∑§ËŸÊ⁄U’Ê¡Ë ¡Ê⁄UË ⁄U„Ë •ı⁄U •ãà ◊¥ ‚ŒŸ ∑§Ë ∑§Êÿ¸flÊ„Ë SÕÁªÃ ∑§⁄U ŒË–

Ÿ‡ÊŸ‹ „⁄UÊÀ« ◊Ê◊‹Ê— ‚⁄U∑§Ê⁄U øøʸ ∑§ÙÃÒƒÿÊ⁄U, ‹Á∑§Ÿ ÄUÿÙ¥ ÷ʪ ⁄U„Ë ∑§Ê¥ª˝‚?

Patrika news 2015-12-10