Kharge blames ‘vote theft' for his 2019 LS poll defeat
Stating that he has never faced defeat in his long political career, except in 2019, Mr. Kharge claimed he was a victim of election rigging.
Addressing the 'Vote Adhikar Rally' here, Mr. Kharge said, 'In my long political career, I lost for the first time in 2019 Lok Sabha polls due to election fraud.'
'The BJP engaged in 'bogus voting', securing up to 20,000 votes in each of the five Assembly segments under the Kalaburagi Lok Sabha seat in the 2019 Parliamentary election,' he alleged.
'In the last 11 years, we have seen every institution crumbling under Prime Minister Narendra Modi's government. The Enforcement Directorate (ED), CBI and Income Tax, Judiciary, media and even constitutional office holders have been taken over by the BJP-RSS. The ED and CBI are used to harass and intimidate people. Senior leaders of the Congress, including Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi, are being targeted. Even our Chief Minister was not spared,' he said.
Deputy Chief Minister and KPCC chief D.K. Shivakumar extended full support to Mr. Rahul Gandhi in his fight to protect the Constitution and voters' rights.
'This is a historic fight. Rahul Gandhi has sent a strong message about protecting the Constitution and voters' rights. Karnataka is writing the foreword for the election fraud expose in the country. Mr. Rahul Gandhi, during a recent event on the Constitution, had called for setting up legal banks in every booth to protect voters' rights. We are committed to do that,' he said.
Chief Minister Siddaramaiah demanded that Prime Minister Narendra Modi should immediately step down from his post. 'He has no moral right to continue in his post. Mr. Rahul Gandhi's 'vote fraud' expose has shown that he has stolen seats to remain in power,' Mr Siddaramaiah said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hans India
22 minutes ago
- Hans India
Gurugram land deal: ED seeks 7-year rigorous imprisonment for Robert Vadra
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has sought a maximum of seven years of rigorous imprisonment for Robert Vadra and others in the tainted 2008 Gurugram land deal, shows the prosecution complaint filed by the probe agency at a Special PMLA court in Delhi. The probe agency has also sought confiscation by the government of 43 immovable properties allegedly acquired by Vadra and others using proceeds of crime (PoC) generated through money laundering. The Special PMLA court in Delhi has fixed August 28 to take cognisance of the ED complaint and issued a notice to Vadra. While elaborating on the mode of generation of PoC of money laundering by Robert Vadra in the land deal, the ED alleged in the complaint that the husband of Congress MP Priyanka Gandhi Vadra and other accused also committed a penal offence of dishonest or fraudulent execution of a deed of transfer containing false statements (Section 423 of Indian Penal Code). In its prosecution complaint filed in a Special PMLA court in Delhi, the ED sought a maximum of seven years imprisonment for Vadra and other accused under Section 4 (Punishment for money laundering) and suggested penal or criminal action for the fraudulent execution of the deed. 'The transfer deed was executed containing a false statement of consideration with regards to receipt of sale consideration by the seller from the buyer and with regards to the total amount of consideration as well, thereby violating the provisions of section 423 of IPC. The buyer had never issued the cheque to the seller and the cheque mentioned in the sale deed did not pertain to the buyer,' said the chargesheet. Alleging a loss of Rs 44 lakh caused to Haryana government in stamp duty, the ED said: 'The sale deed refers the valuation of the said land at Rs 7.50 crore, on the contrary the seller got the payment of Rs 7.95 crore on August 9, 2008 (against sale consideration and stamp duty); and Rs 7.43 crore on August 16, 2008 (additional sale consideration). The undervaluation of the land directly leads to evasion of stamp duty.' Earlier, the ED justified its decision to file the PMLA case in the Special Court in Delhi by claiming that all the accused, except one, reside in Delhi and all the entities associated with the accused, which are involved in the process of money laundering, are registered in the Delhi jurisdiction. It is submitted that the FIR in this case was filed by the Gurugram Police. However, the offence of money laundering was committed by the accused at various places/states including Delhi, Haryana, Punjab, Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat and Rajasthan. 'Further, most of the bank accounts of the entities associated with Vadra, identified as accused number 1, are also situated in Delhi and used by the accused in Delhi to acquire assets or to satisfy the liabilities of companies registered in Delhi,' it said. The ED said that Vadra received Rs 58 crore as proceeds of crime (PoC) of the involved money laundering and claimed that its investigation led to the provisional attachment of 43 immovable properties, totalling Rs 38.69 crore, identified as direct or value equivalent to Proceeds of Crime. Seeking confiscation of the 43 immovable properties, the ED said: 'The complaint is filed with the prayer to punish the accused persons under Section 4 (Punishment for money laundering,) which is a rigorous imprisonment for three to seven years and confiscation by the government of the properties earned by the accused as proceeds of crime.'
Hans India
22 minutes ago
- Hans India
Robert Vadra dodged questions, put onus on deceased associates in money laundering probe: ED
Robert Vadra, businessman and husband of Congress MP Priyanka Gandhi Vadra, has been accused by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) of giving evasive and non-cooperative replies during questioning about a suspicious 2008 land deal in Gurugram's Shikohpur village. According to the ED's 332-page chargesheet, filed before a special Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) court in Delhi, Vadra repeatedly avoided direct answers and instead shifted full responsibility onto his three deceased associates, refusing to clarify his own role in the deal. His reluctance to cooperate significantly delayed the investigation and obstructed the agency's efforts to trace the flow of illicit funds. The federal agency alleges that Vadra used his political connections, including influence through former Haryana Chief Minister Bhupinder Singh Hooda, to pressurise the government officials into approving the land transaction, which involved alleged fraudulent practices and money laundering. The chargesheet reveals that Vadra's company, Skylight Hospitality Private Limited, acquired 3.5 acres of land for Rs 7.50 crore in a deal where no real payment was made. The cheque mentioned in the sale deed was never issued by Vadra, and its value was significantly below market rates. Despite these irregularities, the deal was pushed through by the Directorate of Town and Country Planning (DTCP), allegedly after backdated approvals and altered plans to qualify for commercial licensing. Throughout the investigation, Vadra's evasiveness complicated the probe. The ED claims his refusal to provide clear responses hindered uncovering the full scope of the alleged money laundering and fraud. The agency has identified Rs 58 crore as proceeds of crime and provisionally attached 43 immovable properties worth Rs 38.69 crore linked to the case. Vadra and seven companies tied to him stand accused alongside others. The special PMLA court has scheduled August 28 to consider the ED's complaint and issued notices to Vadra and co-accused.
The Hindu
22 minutes ago
- The Hindu
J&K Assembly's nominated seats outside the realm of govt., L-G has statutory powers: MHA
The Union Ministry of Home Affairs has informed the Jammu and Kashmir High Court that the Union Territory's Lieutenant-Governor can nominate five members to the J&K Legislative Assembly without the government's 'aid and advice'. It said the office of the Lieutenant-Governor was not an extension of the government. The Ministry said that the nominations were 'outside the realm of the business of the elected government of J&K'. 'Once the Parliament bylaw recognises the Lieutenant-Governor as a distinct authority from the government of Union Territory under Parliamentary enactment, it necessarily follows that when a power is conferred upon the Lieutenant-Governor, then the same must be exercised as a statutory function and not as an extension of his duties as the head of the UT Government.... there can be no manner of doubt that it is the Lieutenant-Governor who has to exercise this statutory duty in his discretion, as a statutory functionary and not as an extension of the government, thus, without aid and advice,' the MHA's affidavit in court said. The powers to nominate three members -- two Kashmiri migrants, including a woman, and one member from the Pakistan-occupied-J&K (PoJK) community -- to the Assembly was inserted in 2023 with an amendment to the J&K Reorganisation Act, 2019 by the Parliament. The 2019 Act also provided for nomination of two women to the Assembly if in the opinion of the Lieutenant-Governor, women are not adequately represented in the Assembly. The amendment was challenged through a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by Congress leader Ravinder Kumar Sharma. While hearing the petition, the High Court on October 21, 2024 had sought a reply from the Union government on the changes to the 2019 Act. 'Whether Sections, 15, 15-A and 15-b of the J&K Reorganisation Act, 2019, making provision for nominating the members of Legislative Assembly over and above the sanctioned strength of the Legislative Assembly, and which have the potential of converting the minority government into a majority government and vice versa, is ultra vires the Constitution being in violation of basic structure of the Constitution?' it had asked. The 2023 amendment had increased the total number of seats to 119 from the existing 114. The government had kept 24 seats vacant for the PoJK areas. In the affidavit filed on July 24, the MHA said the 'present writ petition has become academic as the scenario contemplated did not arise'. It said that 'the interpretation of Section 12 of the Union Territories Act, 1963 would pari materia apply to Sections 15, 15A and 15B of the J&K Reorganisation Act and accordingly, the nominations so made, would be made without the aid and advice of the Council of Ministers, being outside the realm of the business of the elected government of J&K.' The MHA said that the petitioner had failed to substantiate the claim that the nominations made under the J&K Reorganisation Act, 2019 exceed the sanctioned strength of the Legislative Assembly, while those under the Government of Union Territories Act, 1963, do not. 'The Petitioner has not provided any cogent legal basis or statutory interpretation to support such a distinction, and the submissions in this regard remain misconceived and unsustainable in law,' the MHA said. It added that Section 14(3) of the 2019 Act 'does not provide the total strength of the Legislative Assembly; but merely provides the number of directly elected members to such Legislative Assembly'. 'The sanctioned strength of the Assembly, therefore, is not 114, but 114 + all members nominated in terms of Sections 15, 15A and 15B,' the MHA said. It further said that the fallacious statutory interpretation of the petitioner was to be cross-applied to the Union Territory of Puducherry, then as per such reading, the total strength of the Assembly of Puducherry under Section 3(2) of the 1963 Act would be 30. 'Whereas, as per his own case, the sanctioned strength of the Legislative Assembly for the UT of Puducherry has been stated to be 33, i.e. 30 +3,' MHA said. The case is scheduled for hearing on August 14. The election to the 90-seat J&K Assembly was held in September-October 2024 and the results were declared on October 8, with the National Conference-Congress alliance sweeping the polls.
