Bharuch NREGA scam investigators detain Gujarat Congress VP
Surat:
Gujarat Congress
vice-president Hira Jotva was detained by a Bharuch police team investigating the Rs. 7.3 crore NREGA scam. The Bharuch superintendent of police formed a 10-member SIT under a deputy superintendent of police.
According to sources, the SIT found that both agencies involved in the scam had links with Jotva. Police may arrest Jotva on Friday if he is found to be involved in the scam.
The scam affected 56 villages in Hansot, Amod and Jambusar talukas of Bharuch where two agencies were entrusted with contracts for road and other construction works under the National Rural Employment Guarantee (NREGA) scheme. The agencies siphoned off money with the help of local officials by submitting forged bills.
They also did not use the materials specified by the govt in the standard operating procedure (SOP).
Both agencies involved bore the address of Supasi village, which is Jotva's village.
On Thursday morning, Bharuch LCB police reached the office of Jotva at Supasi village in Gir-Somnath district's Veraval taluka. They detained him and left for Bharuch to question him.
"We had booked Piyush Ratilal Nukani, the proprietor of Jalaram Enterprise and Jodha Naran Sabhad, the owner of Murlidhar Enterprise in the Rs.
7.3 crore MNREGA scam. We suspect these accused are just faces and the agencies were operated by Jotva. We will question him over his role in the agencies and may arrest him if he cannot answer our questions satisfactorily," said an officer.
Jotva is a senior Congress leader and is a vice-president in the Gujarat Congress. He contested the Junagadh Lok Sabha seat against BJP's Rajesh Chudasama in 2024 and lost. He served as sarpanch of Supasi village from 1991 to 2004. In 2023, he also contested elections from Keshod but lost. He has served at various posts in the Congress since 1995.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
42 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
What's next for birthright citizenship as US Supreme Court's ruling expand Trump's power
The legal battle over President Donald Trump's move to end birthright citizenship is far from over despite the Republican administration's major victory Friday limiting nationwide injunctions. Donald Trump's executive order, signed in January, seeks to deny citizenship to children who are born to people who are living in the U.S. illegally or temporarily. (AFP) Immigrant advocates are vowing to fight to ensure birthright citizenship remains the law as the Republican president tries to do away with more than a century of precedent. The high court's ruling sends cases challenging the president's birthright citizenship executive order back to the lower courts. But the ultimate fate of the president's policy remains uncertain. Here's what to know about birthright citizenship, the Supreme Court's ruling and what happens next. What does birthright citizenship mean? Birthright citizenship makes anyone born in the United States an American citizen, including children born to mothers in the country illegally. The practice goes back to soon after the Civil War, when Congress ratified the Constitution's 14th Amendment, in part to ensure that Black people, including former slaves, had citizenship. 'All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States,' the amendment states. Thirty years later, Wong Kim Ark, a man born in the U.S. to Chinese parents, was refused re-entry into the U.S. after traveling overseas. His suit led to the Supreme Court explicitly ruling that the amendment gives citizenship to anyone born in the U.S., no matter their parents' legal status. It has been seen since then as an intrinsic part of U.S. law, with only a handful of exceptions, such as for children born in the U.S. to foreign diplomats. Trump has long said he wants to do away with birthright citizenship Trump's executive order, signed in January, seeks to deny citizenship to children who are born to people who are living in the U.S. illegally or temporarily. It's part of the hardline immigration agenda of the president, who has called birthright citizenship a 'magnet for illegal immigration.' Trump and his supporters focus on one phrase in the amendment — 'subject to the jurisdiction thereof' – saying it means the U.S. can deny citizenship to babies born to women in the country illegally. A series of federal judges have said that's not true, and issued nationwide injunctions stopping his order from taking effect. 'I've been on the bench for over four decades. I can't remember another case where the question presented was as clear as this one is. This is a blatantly unconstitutional order,' U.S. District Judge John Coughenour said at a hearing earlier this year in his Seattle courtroom. In Greenbelt, Maryland, a Washington suburb, U.S. District Judge Deborah Boardman wrote that 'the Supreme Court has resoundingly rejected and no court in the country has ever endorsed' Trump's interpretation of birthright citizenship. Is Trump's order constitutional? The justices didn't say The high court's ruling was a major victory for the Trump administration in that it limited an individual judge's authority in granting nationwide injunctions. The administration hailed the ruling as a monumental check on the powers of individual district court judges, whom Trump supporters have argued want to usurp the president's authority with rulings blocking his priorities around immigration and other matters. But the Supreme Court did not address the merits of Trump's bid to enforce his birthright citizenship executive order. 'The Trump administration made a strategic decision, which I think quite clearly paid off, that they were going to challenge not the judges' decisions on the merits, but on the scope of relief,' said Jessica Levinson, a Loyola Law School professor. Attorney General Pam Bondi told reporters at the White House that the administration is 'very confident' that the high court will ultimately side with the administration on the merits of the case. Questions and uncertainty swirl around next steps The justices kicked the cases challenging the birthright citizenship policy back down to the lower courts, where judges will have to decide how to tailor their orders to comply with the new ruling. The executive order remains blocked for at least 30 days, giving lower courts and the parties time to sort out the next steps. The Supreme Court's ruling leaves open the possibility that groups challenging the policy could still get nationwide relief through class-action lawsuits and seek certification as a nationwide class. Within hours after the ruling, two class-action suits had been filed in Maryland and New Hampshire seeking to block Trump's order. But obtaining nationwide relief through a class action is difficult as courts have put up hurdles to doing so over the years, said Suzette Malveaux, a Washington and Lee University law school professor. 'It's not the case that a class action is a sort of easy, breezy way of getting around this problem of not having nationwide relief,' said Malveaux, who had urged the high court not to eliminate the nationwide injunctions. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who penned the court's dissenting opinion, urged the lower courts to 'act swiftly on such requests for relief and to adjudicate the cases as quickly as they can so as to enable this Court's prompt review" in cases 'challenging policies as blatantly unlawful and harmful as the Citizenship Order.' Opponents of Trump's order warned there would be a patchwork of polices across the states, leading to chaos and confusion without nationwide relief. 'Birthright citizenship has been settled constitutional law for more than a century," said Krish O'Mara Vignarajah, president and CEO of Global Refuge, a nonprofit that supports refugees and migrants. 'By denying lower courts the ability to enforce that right uniformly, the Court has invited chaos, inequality, and fear.'
Indian Express
an hour ago
- Indian Express
As wheels turn, albeit slowly, during Rath Yatra in Puri, BJP govt faces the heat
A delay in pulling the chariot of Lord Jagannath, which only moved a few metres before the day ended, and apparent lapses in crowd management during the annual Rath Yatra in Puri have put the Odisha government in a spot, particularly as it aims to make the event 'incident-free' this year. Despite the administration's claim of conducting all rituals on time on Friday, the three chariots couldn't be pulled even half the distance from Jagannath Temple to Gundicha Temple, a distance of around 3 km. The chariot of Lord Jagannath, the last to be pulled, moved only a few metres in a ritualistic manner. All three chariots reached Gundicha Temple, the deities' birthplace, on Saturday. Odisha minister Prithiviraj Harichandan said the delay was due to an unprecedented turnout of devotees and due to Lord Balabhadra's chariot getting stuck while negotiating. Officials acknowledged the massive surge in devotees hampered the coordination. More than 200 attendees also fell ill due to high humidity and the swelling crowd; most were discharged after primary treatment at first aid centres near the Grand Road and in various hospitals in Puri. The hospitals and first aid centres reported cases of minor injuries, vomiting and fainting. 'There were no reports of casualties, devotees sustaining major injuries or requiring intensive care,' an official said. The opposition stepped up its attack on the BJP government in the state for the 'terrible mess'. The opposition accused the government of issuing excessive cordon passes to the ruling party workers, leading to the chaos. Stating that they don't intend to point fingers or blame the administration for the delay in pulling the Nandighosha chariot, former chief minister and leader of the opposition Naveen Patnaik said it's impossible not to voice their concern and anguish over how things unfolded. 'It's hard to forget how, last year, Lord Balabhadra's idol slipped during the Adapa Bije Pahandi – a moment that left countless devotees shaken. And now this year, we witnessed Nandighosha ratha still standing at the Singhadwar till 7:45 pm, only to move a few metres before the day ended,' wrote Patnaik on X. Patnaik said the delay left the devotees 'disenchanted and disillusioned'. 'All we can do is pray: May Mahaprabhu Jagannath forgive all those responsible for the terrible mess that has overshadowed this divine festival this year. I hope it leads to deep introspection by all in government,' he posted. The Congress also targeted the state government for the 'mismanagement'. Odisha's law minister said there shouldn't be any politics over the issue as 'everything happens as per the Lord's wish'.
Hindustan Times
an hour ago
- Hindustan Times
Constitution's Preamble should not be altered, says Mayawati
: Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) president Mayawati on Saturday stated the Constitution's preamble is a fundamental part of the document and should not be altered. Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) president Mayawati (Sourced) The four-time former Uttar Pradesh chief minister made this remark in an apparent reaction to Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) general secretary Dattatreya Hosabale's statement on Thursday that there should be a discussion on whether the words 'socialist' and 'secular' should remain in the Preamble as these were added later. Addressing the media at the party's state office in Lucknow, Mayawati said the BSP and the people are watching the actions of the RSS, BJP, and Congress on this issue. She accused the Congress and the BJP-led NDA government of making unnecessary changes to the Constitution to serve their respective interests and ideologies. Describing the Constitution as a sacred document that has empowered millions of people, she said any attempt to undermine it will be resisted. She advised against making any changes to the Constitution that could undermine its humanistic objectives. She said the BSP strongly condemns such actions and demands that the Constitution be respected and protected. She criticised the Congress and BJP-led NDA government for not implementing the Indian Constitution in its true spirit, which was drafted by Dr B.R Ambedkar. She expressed concern about the politics surrounding language in some states, emphasising the importance of respecting all languages as per the Constitution. The BSP president suggested that debates on language should be constructive and not lead to conflicts between governments and parties. The former chief minister highlighted the need for clarity on voter list improvements and electoral reforms, which should be done in consultation with all political parties. She expressed concern about the 'rising incidents' of communal violence, caste-based atrocities, and violence against women in various parts of the country. She called upon governments to take proactive measures to ensure women's safety and prevent such incidents. Mayawati stressed the importance of being vigilant about international terrorism and taking proactive measures to prevent it. She discussed the BSP's efforts to strengthen the party organisation across the country, including reviewing its structure and holding meetings with state-level leaders.
