oppn parties Why Doesn't Kejriwal Join The Investigation If He Has Proof?

News Snippets

  • NCLT initiates bankruptcy proceedings against former Videocon chairman Venugopal Dhoot for defaulting on loans of Rs 6158cr as personal guarantor in two group companies
  • LIC approves 1:1 bonus share issue
  • Gold and silver futures also go down by 0.7% and 2.2% respectively
  • Stocks tumbled again on Monday as crude prices rose: Sensex went down by 703 points and Nifty by 207 points
  • Supreme Court refuses to cancel the land-for-jobs FIR against Lalu Prasad
  • The spectre of El Nino haunts India: IMD predicts 'below normal ' monsoon this year
  • Labour protest over increase in wages by 35% (as per Haryana example) turns violent in Noida, nearly 200 were detained by the police
  • Congress leader Sonia Gandhi said that the delimitation exercise must be carried out after the Census is complete
  • PM Modi says Parliament is on the verge of creating history as the Houses get ready to take up the women's reservation bills
  • Tata Sons chairman N Chandrasekaran said that TCS COO Aarthi Subramanian is conducting a thorough inquiry to establish facts and identify individuals involved in the sexual harassment allegations at the company's Nashik office
  • Asha Bhonsle laid to rest with full state honours on Monday in Mumbai
  • AAP leader Arvind Kejriwal once again approached the Delhi HC to request the recusal of a judge from his case
  • Candidates Chess: R Vaishali on the verge of creating history, but needs two wins - one with black pieces - against formidable opponents to emerge as the challenger
  • Rohit Sharma, who retired hurt in the match versus RCB, underwent scans for possible hamstring injury
  • IPL: Abhishek Sharma fails for SRH but Ishan Kishan (91) shines. Then, Vaibhav Sooryavanshi fails for RR and SRH bolwers, especially unheralded Praful Hinge (4 for 24) and Sakib Hussain (4 for 24) win it for SRH. This was the first loss for table-toppers RR
Supreme Court questions Election Commission about SIR SOP and why logical discrepancy was introduced only in Bengal
oppn parties
Why Doesn't Kejriwal Join The Investigation If He Has Proof?

By Sunil Garodia
First publised on 2024-02-05 06:28:55

About the Author

Sunil Garodia Editor-in-Chief of indiacommentary.com. Current Affairs analyst and political commentator. Author of Cyber Scams in India, Digital Arrest, The Money Trap and The Human Hack

Before AAP supremo Arvind Kejriwal can accuse Delhi Police of 'drama', he has to explain to the public why he made wild allegations (in the absence of proof, they will remain so) about the BJP offering Rs 25cr to his MLAs to switch sides. Kejriwal has often raised the bogey of his MLAs being approached by the BJP ever since AAP formed the government in Delhi. But this time he has accused that money was offered and has also put forth a figure. As per the laws of the nation, offering cash or other inducements to people's representatives to switch sides is a cognizable offence. Hence, if someone accuses that MLAs are being paid money to switch allegiance and if the police receive a complaint in this regard, it is their duty to investigate the matter. In the instant case, the Delhi unit of the BJP has filed a complaint. So, Delhi Police was not in drama mode but conducting a serious investigation for bribery to MLAs.

Arvind Kejriwal, and for that matter no political leader, cannot be allowed to get away with making false and wild allegations against any other party. If, indeed, AAP MLAs were offered money, Kejriwal should join the investigation and present proof of that. If concrete proof is not available, he can at least inform the police which of his MLAs were approached and by whom. But that again will be hearsay as obviously Kejriwal was definitely not present when the alleged offer was made to his MLAs. What is to stop the MLAs from spreading false tales to increase their bargaining power in the party? Kejriwal has ignored five summons from the ED in the Delhi liquor excise case. Now he will most likely ignore the Delhi police summons in the MLA bribery case too. Each time he takes the stand that these investigations are politically motivated. But if he has nothing to hide in the first case and has proof in the second, what is stopping him from joining the investigation and clearing the matter?