Vedike demands suspension of Minister Priyank Kharge
The members of Zilla Nagarika Hitharakshane Vedike demanded suspension of Rural Development and Panchayat Raj Minister Priyank Kharge from the Cabinet for allegedly misusing his power for wrongful confinement of Chalavadi Narayanaswamy, Leader of Opposition in Legislative Council, at Chittapur town on May 21.
Vedike members Ambaraya Ashtagi, former Mayor Vishal Dhargi, former Zilla panchayat member Basavaraj Bennur, who are also BJP leaders, jointly addressing press conference in Kalaburagi city on Thursday alleged that a group of rowdy elements those indulged in illegal sand mining at Chittapur taluk, nurtured by Mr. Kharge were responsible for disturbing law and order situation at Chittapur on that day of incident.
Mr. Ashtagi claimed that the entire episode was the result of a planned conspiracy against Mr. Narayanaswamy; he claimed that a group of 30 to 40 people tailed the BJP leader from Kalaburagi to Chittapur and they carried black paint and eggs to attack him at Chittapur guest house.
He also accused the police of lodging false cases under the SC and ST(Prevention of Atrocities) Act against N. Ravi Kumar, MLC.
Mr. Bennur and Mr. Dhargi said that besides confining Mr. Narayanaswamy for five hours in guest house at Chittapur, the Congress workers and followers of Mr. Priyank Kharge have allegedly manhandled Mr. Ashtagi along with other BJP leaders – Pritam Patil, Nijagunagowda Yalgod and Shivu Ashtagi; and a case has been lodged against Arun Yagapur, Maruti Halagi, Shivanand Hongunti, Rafeeq, Uday Sagar and Nagaraj Kallak, he added.
The Vedike members demanded suspension of Mr. Priyank Kharge from the State cabinet, stern action against the police officers for dereliction of duty in connection with Chittapur incident; they also demanded action against the Congress workers and anti-social elements for taking law into their hands.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indian Express
23 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Back in public eye: Madhya Pradesh minister who put party in a spot with remarks on Col Sofiya Qureshi
After his remarks on Operation Sindoor caused an uproar, Madhya Pradesh Tribal Welfare Minister Vijay Shah made his first public appearance in 17 days when he visited the family of a rape-murder victim in Khandwa. Shah was booked by the Madhya Pradesh Police last month after saying in a public meeting in Mhow on May 11 that India taught a lesson to those responsible for the Pahalgam terror attack using 'their own sister'. While he did not name anyone, it has been alleged that he was alluding to Colonel Sofiya Qureshi, who had briefed the media when Operation Sindoor was underway. The minister is now under investigation by a Supreme Court-ordered special investigation team (SIT), and had not been seen in public until May 28, when he visited the grieving family of a woman who was gangraped and murdered in Khandwa district's Khalwa region. Both the Madhya Pradesh High Court and the Supreme Court have reprimanded the minister for his statement, and Shah has apologised for the comments three times. The ruling BJP went into damage control mode, and the central leadership of the party is yet to take a call on Shah's future. While his visit to Khandwa on May 28 marks his first public outing since the backlash, he did not speak to the media. Local BJP sources said Shah spent over two hours with the victim's family and promised both financial support and systemic interventions. He reportedly handed over a Rs 60,000 cheque, committed to building a tin roof for the family's house, and promised further financial assistance, sources said. 'He also said that a young girl in the family who had dropped out of school would be re-enrolled. Monthly monitoring meetings are to be initiated in the area to track school dropouts,' a BJP leader said. The Opposition Congress had launched a sarcastic 'missing minister' campaign, plastering posters across Indore and Bhopal with his photograph and a mock reward of Rs 11,000 for anyone who could find him. During this period, Shah skipped the special Cabinet meeting in the historic Rajwada palace to commemorate regional icon, Ahilyabai Holkar, on May 20 and another special Cabinet meeting hosted in the scenic town of Pachmarhi on Tuesday, to honour tribal icon and freedom fighter, Raja Bhabhoot Singh. Shah had also skipped the 300th birth anniversary events of Ahilyabai Holkar, for which Prime Minister Narendra Modi had arrived in Bhopal on May 31. The Supreme Court has extended the operation of its interim order protecting Shah from arrest. It also closed the suo motu proceedings pending before the Madhya Pradesh High Court as it is already seized of the matter. The SIT had submitted its report to the Supreme Court, which contained investigation details like forensic evidence, and sought more time for the probe.
Hindustan Times
24 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Jr ministers carp about their seniors, Sena ministers crib to Shinde about Ajit
MUMBAI: Junior ministers or ministers of state (MOS) in the Mahayuti government have sought the intervention of chief minister Devendra Fadnavis in the matter of delegation of powers by the cabinet ministers of their departments to clear files, hold hearings and other policy-related decisions. The state cabinet has six MOSes—three from the BJP, two from the Shiv Sena and one from the NCP—while the remaining 36 are cabinet ministers. The BJP's MOSes have written to the CM both independently and jointly for his intervention. Their gripe is that despite being sworn in seven months ago, the cabinet ministers have not delegated powers to them, and they have been left with trifling jobs such as receiving memorandums and giving replies to the questions during assembly sessions. 'Junior ministers like Madhuri Misal and Meghana Bordikar have written to the CM,' said a senior BJP leader. 'The departments they represent are mostly headed by Shiv Sena leaders who have not delegated any powers. For instance, as MOS of the urban development department, powers to hold hearings on town planning and policies related to some urban local bodies are expected to be delegated but Sena ministers have not done it so far.' The leader said that the MOSes had written such letters to Fadnavis in the past as well. 'The CM has assured the junior ministers that he will look into the matter at the earliest,' he said. 'The decision is likely to happen before the monsoon session, which begins on June 30.' The BJP leader added that this sort of thing happened in almost all coalition governments, but the tussle had intensified this time. 'The Sena ministers, particularly, have not delegated powers to their MOSes,' he said. 'Ministers of state from the Shiv Sena, on the other hand, have been given powers by the BJP ministers of their departments. For instance, minister of state for home Yogesh Kadam, a Sena leader, has been given specific powers by CM Fadnavis, who heads the department. Similarly, another Sena MOS, Ashish Jaiswal, has been given some powers by deputy chief minister Ajit Pawar in the finance department.' When questioned, Jaiswal said, 'The MOSes who have capabilities get powers.' According to Sena leaders, there is a lot for junior ministers to do in their departments if they have the capability and know how to use their powers. 'Jaiswal and Kadam have been working efficiently and have played a key role in the decisions and policies of their respective departments,' said a Sena leader. Meanwhile, senior ministers in the Mahayuti too have similar issues. A recent review meeting convened by deputy chief minister Eknath Shinde to assess the performance of Shiv Sena-led departments before the local body polls turned into a litany of complaints against NCP leader and finance minister Ajit Pawar. The Sena ministers complained that the discretionary powers held by Ajit were being used to deprive their departments of budgetary funds. Shinde, however, assured his ministers that he would raise the issue with Ajit and chief minister Devendra Fadnavis.
Hindustan Times
24 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
‘Not contempt': SC refuses to quash Chhattisgarh's anti-Naxal law
The Supreme Court has dismissed a plea challenging the Chhattisgarh Auxiliary Armed Police Force Act, 2011, holding that its enactment by the state legislature does not amount to contempt of the court's previous order that outlawed the controversial Salwa Judum militia. While refusing to strike down the 2011 legislation, the top court, however, made it unequivocally clear that it is the constitutional duty of both the Centre and the Chhattisgarh government to ensure peace and rehabilitation for the people affected by violence in the region. 'We note that it is duty of the State of Chhattisgarh as well as the Union of India to take adequate steps for bringing about peace and rehabilitation to the residents of State of Chhattisgarh who have been affected by the violence from whatever quarter it may have arisen,' a bench of justices BV Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma stated in its May 15 order, released recently. The bench noted that though the earlier order dated July 5, 2011 in the Nandini Sundar Vs State of Chhattisgarh case had directed the state to desist from using Special Police Officers (SPOs) in anti-Naxal operations, the 2011 Act did not violate or override that ruling, nor could the enactment of a law be equated to contempt of court. 'Any law made by the Parliament or a State legislature cannot be held to be an act of contempt of a Court, including this Court, for simply making the law…The passing of an enactment subsequent to the order of this Court by the legislature of the State of Chhattisgarh cannot, in our view, be said to be an act of contempt of the order passed by this Court,' held the bench. The bench added that the legislative action undertaken by the State was an exercise of its legitimate power under the Constitution. 'Every State Legislature has plenary powers to pass an enactment and so long as the said enactment has not been declared to be ultra vires the Constitution or, in any way, null and void by a Constitutional Court, the said enactment would have the force of law,' it said. Led by senior advocate Nitya Ramakrishnan, the petitioners — sociologist Nandini Sundar, historian Ramachandra Guha, former bureaucrat EAS Sarma, had argued that the enactment of the 2011 law was in contempt of the apex court's July 2011 judgment, which held that the practice of appointing tribal youth as SPOs and arming them to fight Maoists was unconstitutional. They contended that the new law merely gave legislative backing to an arrangement that had already been struck down by the court. However, the court noted that while the earlier directions in the Nandini Sundar judgment prohibited the use of SPOs for counter-insurgency operations and ordered disbanding of armed vigilante groups like Salwa Judum, the enactment of a new law by the state legislature could not, by itself, be equated to contempt. It added that the petitioners must mount an appropriate legal challenge if they sought to assail the validity of the 2011 law because the 'interpretative power of a constitutional court does not contemplate a situation of declaring exercise of legislative functions and passing of an enactment as an instance of a contempt of a court.' The region has witnessed a decades-old Maoist insurgency, marked by frequent clashes between security forces and armed rebels, and has claimed thousands of lives over the years, including those of civilians, security personnel, and insurgents. The present litigation arises out of the Supreme Court's landmark 2011 judgment that had declared the use of tribal civilians as SPOs to combat Maoist insurgency as unconstitutional and violative of human rights. The top court had categorically banned the use of SPOs, many of them minors, and ordered disbanding of private militias like Salwa Judum and Koya Commandos, terming their activities as 'unconstitutional'. In that order, the apex court directed the immediate cessation of using SPOs in any form of counter-insurgency operations, withdrawal of all firearms issued to SPOs, prosecution of those responsible for criminal acts committed under the aegis of Salwa Judum and NHRC and CBI probes into grave human rights violations, including alleged arson and killings in some identified districts in Chhattisgarh. However, soon after the 2011 verdict, the state government enacted the Chhattisgarh Auxiliary Armed Police Force Act, purportedly to legitimise the appointment of locals in auxiliary armed forces, prompting fresh litigation and a contempt plea by the petitioners, who argued that the enactment was an 'attempt to nullify' the Supreme Court's binding directions and that the state's move to reintroduce civilian combatants under a new statutory garb amounted to willful disobedience. They also flagged non-compliance with the court's directive to rehabilitate former SPOs, prosecute members of Salwa Judum for past atrocities, and investigate attacks on activists such as Swami Agnivesh, who was assaulted in 2011 while trying to visit affected villages. Rejecting these arguments, the bench held that enacting a law is a legislative act and must be challenged accordingly, not via contempt jurisdiction. It also took note of the Centre's and Chhattisgarh government's submission that they had complied with the directions issued in 2011 and had filed the requisite compliance reports. The Salwa Judum was a state-sponsored civil militia movement initiated in 2005 as a counter-insurgency strategy against Maoist rebels in southern Chhattisgarh. Comprising largely tribal youth armed with basic training and firearms, the movement rapidly became notorious for serious human rights abuses, including extra-judicial killings, sexual violence and forced displacement of villagers. The Salwa Judum was disbanded officially following the 2011 judgment.
