Lok Sabha Debates
Regarding Charge-Sheet Filed In Bofors Case on 26 October, 1999
Title: Regarding charge-sheet filed in Bofors Case.
11.12 hrs. SHRI MADHAVRAO SCINDIA (GUNA) : Mr. Speaker, Sir, it has been a very long and arduous election. The Congress, as always, in all humility accepts the verdict of the people whether it propels us into Government or makes us sit in the Opposition because we believe that Government and Opposition are the two sides of the same democratic coin. It is in that spirit that we approached this new Parliament. But, we could never imagine the depths to which the Government were prepared to fall in the way they have vitiated the atmosphere and made their intentions clear in launching a witch-hunt after ten long years, dragging in the name of our dear departed leader Shri Rajiv Gandhi into the Bofors chargesheet without a shred of evidence. It is a matter of great shame that a leader of his stature after having passed away, a person who has no opportunity now to defend himself or to represent himself in the court, should be brought into the Bofors chargesheet.
Mr. Speaker, Sir, surprisingly, one of the hon. Ministers said, Shri Rajiv Gandhi may have passed away and it may be true that there may not be a shred of evidence against him in the Bofors chargesheet but his name had to be dragged in so as to make the chargesheet sustainable. I think, this is a shocking and a very candid statement made on behalf of the Government. We cannot help but reach the conclusion that this is an attempt to denigrate the Congress; an attempt to divert attention from their own mismanagement of affairs and from their own scandals that beset them; and an attempt to denigrate the name of the late Rajiv Gandhi, who in his life time achieved the pinnacle of popularity in this country and in a short career established a weight and an influence on the world stage. I think that the dignity of the House here is also affected. Let us not forget that he was also the Leader of this august House.
We believe, Sir, that the law must take its own course. But, Mr. Speaker, Sir, let the Government not determine what that course of law should be. We want to make a clear distinction. We are keen that the Bofors investigation reaches its conclusion; we are keen that the guilty are brought book; we are keen that the guilty are prosecuted; but we have great objection to the dragging in of the names of innocent people into this chargesheet after their demise.
Therefore, while we insist that the Bofors case should continue to its logical conclusion, we do expect the Government to respond appropriately and delete the name of the late Rajiv Gandhi from the Bofors chargesheet. We do hope that the Government understands our sentiments and in that spirit acts in accordance with our sentiments. We are looking forward to an appropriate response from the Government. Otherwise, this Session is beginning on a very very inauspicious note and the onus of responsibility for this will entirely be on the Treasury Benches. श्री मुलायम सिंह यादव (सम्भल) : अध्यक्ष महोदय, यह सरकार और कांग्रेस के बीच का मामला नहीं है, यह पूरे सदन का मामला है। हम इस पर चुप नहीं रहेंगे, हम भी इस पर बोलेंगे।... (व्यवधान) अध्यक्ष महोदय, यह सदन का मामला है, इसकी चर्चा में हम भी बोलेंगे और यह हमारा भी मुद्दा रह चुका है, इस पर हम भी बोलेंगे।... ... (व्यवधान)
MR. SPEAKER: This is not a discussion at all. Please understand. Because the Deputy Leader of the Opposition has mentioned something, I allowed him. This is not a debate. Please understand. The Government is also interested to give reply.
... (Interruptions) श्री मुलायम सिंह यादव : अध्यक्ष महोदय, हम भी बोलेंगे। अध्यक्ष महोदय : आप बैठ जाइये। श्री मुलायम सिंह यादव : हमें बोलने का मौका दीजिए। अध्यक्ष महोदय : आप बैठ जाइये।... (व्यवधान)
MR. SPEAKER: The Government is respnding. Please understand.
... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: This is not a discussion at all. Please understand. This is not a debate. Why do you object when the Government is responding? I have asked the Government to respond. The Government is going to respond.
... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: Nothing will go on record.
(Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER:You have asked the Government to respond. The Government is going to respond. But you are not allowing the Government to respond.
... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: Nothing will go on record.
(Interruptions)
SHRI P. H. PANDIAN (TIRUNELVELI): I want to make a suggestion.
MR. SPEAKER: Shri P. H. Pandian, what is your suggestion?
SHRI P. H. PANDIAN : There is no provision under Criminal Procedure Code to launch a prosecution. ... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: You have already raised the issue. The Government is going to reply. There should be some procedure.
_________________________________________________________________________ *Not recorded.
SHRI MANISHANKAR AIYAR (MAYILADUTURAI): We have no objection. You asked me a question. Please give me an opportunity to make my point clear.
MR. SPEAKER: What is your submission?
SHRI PRIYA RANJAN DASMUNSHI (RAIGANJ): Are you allowing a debate?
MR. SPEAKER: No. I am not allowing the debate.
... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: Shri Mulayam Singh Yadav, please sit down. श्री मुलायम सिंह यादव : हमें बोलने का मौका दिया जाए... (व्यवधान) अध्यक्ष महोदय : मुलायम सिंह जी, पहले आप बैठ जाइये। श्री मुलायम सिंह यादव : यह नहीं हो सकता, इसमें बहुत गहरा षडयंत्र है, इसमें सत्ता पक्ष और कांग्रेस पार्टी की नूरा कुश्ती नहीं चलेगी, हम भी बोलेंगे। यह नूरा कुश्ती यहां चलने वाली नहीं है, यह मिला-जुला षडयंत्र यहां नहीं चल पायेगा... (व्यवधान) अध्यक्ष महोदय : मुलायम सिंह जी, पहले आप बैठिए। श्री मुलायम सिंह यादव : यह मिला-जुला सदन नहीं चल पाएगा। हम बोलेंगे। ... (व्यवधान) अध्यक्ष महोदय : पहले आप बैठ जाइए। श्री मुलायम सिंह यादव : यह नहीं हो सकता। अध्यक्ष महोदय : मुलायम सिंह जी, आप बैठ जाइए।SHRI P.H. PANDIAN : Sir, I want to make one submission. ... (Interruptions) I will make my submission in just two minutes"""""""" time.
MR. SPEAKER: Please take your seat. श्री बेनी प्रसाद वर्मा (कैसरगंज): अध्यक्ष महोदय, यह पूरे सदन का मामला है। खाली एक पार्टी का मामला नहीं है। हम लोगों ने इस मामले को उठाया है।... (व्यवधान) अध्यक्ष महोदय : मुलायम सिंह जी, आप बैठ जाइए। आपको बाद में बोलने का समय दिया जाएगा। श्री रघुनाथ झा (गोपालगंज): अध्यक्ष महोदय, मेरा पाइंट ऑफ आर्डर है।MR. SPEAKER: There is no point of order in Zero Hour, please understand.
SHRI MANISHANKAR AIYAR : Mr. Speaker, Sir, you said that you could not hear my point. Will you allow me now? ... (Interruptions) You said that you had not heard my point. Why do you not give us an opportunity to make our point? ... (Interruptions) Please allow us to make our point. If Shri Advani wishes to intervene, I have no objection. Let him continue. ... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: He is intervening.
SHRI MANISHANKAR AIYAR : All right, I will make my submission later. ... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: Please understand, the hon. Minister is intervening. मुलायम सिंह जी, आप बैठ जाइए। श्री मुलायम सिंह यादव : अध्यक्ष महोदय, हम बिना बोले नहीं बैठेंगे। हमें बोलने दिया जाए। यदि आप हमें नहीं बोलने देंगे, तो हम नहीं बैठेंगे। भले ही आप हमें सदन से निकाल दें। यह कया बात हुई कि आप हमें बोलने का समय नहीं देंगे? अध्यक्ष महोदय : आपको चांस दिया जाएगा, लेकिन पहले आप बैठ जाइए। श्री मुलायम सिंह यादव : अध्यक्ष महोदय, हम नहीं बैठेंगे, भले ही हमें सदन से निकाल दें। हम बिना बोले नहीं बैठेंगे।MR. SPEAKER: Shri Mulayam Singh, please understand that the Minister is intervening.
... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: Please understand, the Minister is intervening, not concluding. श्री मुलायम सिंह यादव : अध्यक्ष महोदय, यह मुद्दा बहुत महत्वपूर्ण हैं। अध्यक्ष महोदय : आप ग्ृाह मंत्री जी के बाद बोल सकते हैं। श्री मुलायम सिंह यादव : अध्यक्ष महोदय, सरकार का जवाब तो तभी उचित आएगा, जब हमारी बात सुन ली जाएगी। बिना हमें सुने हम उन्हें नहीं सुन सकते। यह नहीं हो सकता।MR. SPEAKER: Today, we have a very important business. Please understand. Please cooperate with the Chair. श्री मुलायम सिंह यादव : अध्यक्ष महोदय, हम आपको पूरी तरह से कोआपरेट करने के लिए तैयार हैं। अध्यक्ष महोदय : मुलायम सिंह जी, आप सीनियर मैम्बर हैं। आप इस तरह से बीच में कैसे बोल सकते हैं।The hon. Minister is intervening.
... (Interruptions)
SHRI MANISHANKAR AIYAR : Mr. Speaker, Sir, there is a notice in my name saying that this issue will be raised during Zero Hour. ... (Interruptions) श्री मुलायम सिंह यादव : नियम बनाने वाले और परम्पराएं बनाने वाले हम लोग हैं। हमें कया पढ़ाएंगे।SHRI MANISHANKAR AIYAR : Please assure us that I will have the opportunity of making our submission. You had yourself said that you could not hear the point that I made. Now that there is less noise in the House, all I am asking for is an opportunity to intervene in this discussion of essential importance to the Congress Party. If this intervention is not permitted from my side ... (Interruptions)
THE MINISTER OF PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS AND MINISTER OF WATER RESOURCES (SHRI PRAMOD MAHAJAN): Is there any discussion? The Government is prepared for any discussion which they want on this subject.
SHRI MANISHANKAR AIYAR : I am asking for an opportunity to make my submission. ... (Interruptions)
SHRI PRAMOD MAHAJAN: Please give a notice if you want a discussion. We are prepared for any discussion.
SHRI PRIYA RANJAN DASMUNSHI : This morning, we gave a notice to raise the issue during Zero Hour to make our submission and we made it amply clear that two of us will make the submission.
... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: Nothing will go on record.
(Interruptions) श्री मुलायम सिंह यादव : अध्यक्ष महोदय, हम खड़े हैं और आप यहां भाषण करा रहे हैं।... (व्यवधान)
MR. SPEAKER: Please understand that today we have a very important business.
SHRI MANISHANKAR AIYAR : This is the important thing for us.
... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: Shri Raghuvansh Prasad Singh, you have given a notice for adjournment motion also. What is this? Now, you are disturbing the House.
... (Interruptions)
SHRI T.M. SELVAGANAPATHI (SALEM): Please allow us to participate in this. We have also given a notice. ... (Interruptions) अध्यक्ष महोदय : आपका सबमिशन कया है?... (व्यवधान) अध्यक्ष महोदय : अगर ऐसा होगा तो यह हाउस कैसे चलेगा?... (व्यवधान) श्री मुलायम सिंह यादव : अध्यक्ष महोदय, इतने महत्वपूर्ण सवाल पर कया आप हमें बोलने का मौका नहीं देंगे?... (व्यवधान)
MR. SPEAKER: Shri Pandian, please take your seat. I have not allowed you. How can you speak without the permission of the Chair? Please take your seat. What is this?
... (Interruptions)
SHRI MANISHANKAR AIYAR : Sir, I seek an opportunity to speak. ... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: Shri Manishankar Aiyar, please take your seat.
... (Interruptions) अध्यक्ष महोदय : आपको चांस मिलेगा लेकिन पहले आप बैठ जाइये।... (व्यवधान) श्री मुलायम सिंह यादव : आप हमें भी बोलने का मौका दीजिए।... (व्यवधान) अध्यक्ष महोदय : हम आपको मौका देंगे लेकिन पहले आप बैठ जाइये।... (व्यवधान)
MR. SPEAKER: Shri Advani, what is your intervention? ग्ृाह मंत्री (श्री लाल कृष्ण आडवाणी): अध्यक्ष महोदय, सरकार को इस पर बहस कराने में कोई आपत्ित नहीं है। आपको निर्णय करना है कि बहस करानी है या नहीं। ... (व्यवधान) अगर इन्होंने सबमिशन रखना है तो सरकार को रिस्पांस करने का अवसर भी दें।... (व्यवधान)
SHRI PRIYA RANJAN DASMUNSHI : Sir, we have to make our submission first and then only, they can make their submissions. ... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: Shri Manishankar Aiyar, what is your submission?
SHRI MANISHANKAR AIYAR : Thank you, Sir.
Mr. Speaker, Sir, I request you, ...
MR. SPEAKER: What is your submission?
SHRI MANISHANKAR AIYAR : I was about to commence my speech.
MR. SPEAKER: It should be very brief please.
SHRI MANISHANKAR AIYAR : Mr. Speaker, Sir, I rise with an extremely heavy heart because I had hoped to begin my second innings here, ... श्री रघुनाथ झा : अध्यक्ष महोदय, इस देश में दो कानून नहीं चलेंगे। ... (व्यवधान) बड़े लोगों के लिए कोई कानून और दूसरे लोगों के लिए कोई और कानून नहीं होगा।... (व्यवधान)
चोरी करने वाले का नाम तो आएगा।
... (व्यवधान)
MR. SPEAKER: What is your submission, please?
SHRI MANISHANKAR AIYAR : Please let me speak. I cannot make my submission if I am constantly interrupted.
MR. SPEAKER: The Deputy Leader of the Opposition has already made his point. What more do you want?
SHRI MANISHANKAR AIYAR : I have a submission to make and I told you also.
MR. SPEAKER: The Government has also replied that there is no objection in having a discussion.
SHRI MANISHANKAR AIYAR : I seek your permission to be able to make my submission in a House that is listening. Thank you very much, Sir.
Mr. Speaker, Sir, ...
MR. SPEAKER: You are not to go into the merits. Please understand that. He has already mentioned it.
SHRI MANISHANKAR AIYAR : If you are not going to allow me to speak, let me not mention it.
MR. SPEAKER: No. You can mention your point.
... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: You can also mention your point.
SHRI MANISHANKAR AIYAR : I am mentioning my point. I am not even being allowed to begin. I begin by saying this. All that I am allowed to do is the courtesy of addressing you; I am not being allowed to continue. How can I speak? Please allow a Member the right to express his view here, when he has given due notice to the Speaker, in this Hour which is supposed to be dedicated to such a thing. If they continue to behave in this manner, how can you expect me to speak? श्री रघुनाथ झा : अध्यक्ष महोदय, आप किस रूल के मुताबिक इनको बोलने की परमीशन दे रहे हैं।... (व्यवधान)
हम इस सदन में नये मैम्बर हैं।
... (व्यवधान)
आप हमें बताइए कि किस रूल के तहत यहां पर बहस हो रही है।
... (व्यवधान)
MR. SPEAKER: Hon. Member, please take your seat.
... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: Shri Mani Shankar Aiyar, please understand that there are eleven names. They have given notices for Zero Hour on various subjects.
... (Interruptions) श्री रघुनाथ झा : अध्यक्ष महोदय, कया आपने इनको परमीशन दी है?... (व्यवधान) अध्यक्ष महोदय : आप बैठ जाइए।... (व्यवधान)
SHRI MANISHANKAR AIYAR : Mr. Speaker, Sir, we have before us this chargesheet which have a recitation and names listed as accused. ... (Interruptions)
SHRI PRAMOD MAHAJAN): Sir, the Deputy Leader has already spoken on the same subject. ... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: Shri Mani Shankar Aiyar, please understand that Shri Scindia has already spoken on the subject.
... (Interruptions)
SHRI MADHAVRAO SCINDIA : When we give notices under Zero Hour, we are not necessarily submitting on behalf of the party. He, as an individual Member, has every right to raise whatever issue he wants to raise. ... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: Shri Scindia, you have already spoken on this subject.
... (Interruptions)
SHRI PRIYA RANJAN DASMUNSHI : If he wants to raise this issue again, what is wrong in that? If you interrupt everytime, no business can be conducted. ... (Interruptions)
SHRI MANISHANKAR AIYAR : Why are you not allowing me to speak? Why are you afraid of me? Why do you not give me an opportunity to make my submission? ... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: Shri Mani Shankar Aiyar, please address the Chair and not the Members.
... (Interruptions)
SHRI MANISHANKAR AIYAR : Sir, I am addressing you. I am only asking whether I cannot be afforded the opportunity of making a submission without interruption on a matter of high importance to us.
SHRI SONTOSH MOHAN DEB (SILCHAR): The House will continue if you allow him. ... (Interruptions)
SHRI MANISHANKAR AIYAR : Mr. Speaker, Sir, we are confronted with a chargesheet which has a recitation and a set of accused without the link being established in the recition with the accusations that have been put in column 2. In column 2, Shri Rajiv Gandhi has been named. He is a person who in this House led the House; he is a person who was the Leader of the Opposition. ... (Interruptions) श्री लाल मुनि चौबे (बकसर) : ये कया बात कर रहे हैं।... (व्यवधान)
MR. SPEAKER: Shri Choubey, please sit down.
... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: Please take your seats.
... (Interruptions)
SHRI MANI SHANKAR AIYAR : We demand of the Government the deletion from column 2 of the name of Shri Rajiv Gandhi, former Prime Minister, former Leader of this House and former Leader of the Opposition and a martyr to this country who had been honoured with the Bharat Ratna since no ground has been established which would warrant or justify the inclusion of his name in column 2. This has been done with malice aforethought; this has been done with a vicious intent; this has been done with a political purpose; and this has not been done to further the cause of discovering what happened in that particular event.
We repeat what Shri Rajiv Gandhi stated in this House twice over. Once on the 28th of December, 1989 he said, "We would like you to find the people who have taken the money because we know that when you find the people, all the accusations that have been made all these years will turn out to be false". There is nothing in the recitation of the chargesheet which establishes anything other than that Rajiv Gandhi was in no way a beneficiary in any manner to whatever payments that have been made.
There is no link that has been established which would indicate any justification for it to be there. It is furthermore extremely malicious to include his name in Column 2 because not even in the course of the trial, will he be given an opportunity to clear his name. We demand deletion of his name from Column 2 because he was never interrogated by the investigative agency and there is no evidence of any substance or significance that has been adduced in the recitation. There is no possibility that he has of clearing his name in trial. He has been defamed, maligned and we will not stand for this kind of politically motivated defamation. We insist and demand that the Government delete the name of Shri Rajiv Gandhi from the List of Accused. We are ready to await a reply. We wish to have a reply. We wish to know whether the Government will delete his name. This is our demand and we insist upon it. श्री मुलायम सिह यादव : अध्यक्ष महोदय, आपने बड़ी कृपा की कि हमे बोलने का मौका दे ही दिया। अध्यक्ष महोदय : दे दिया न। श्री मुलायम सिंह यादव : नियमावली का उपदेश देने वालों से मेरी एक ही प्रार्थना है कि कल प्रधान मंत्री जी, नेता विरोधी दल से लेकर सारे दलों के नेता बैठे थे और आपके समक्ष यह तय हुआ था कि धन्यवाद प्रस्ताव के समर्थन पर बहस होगी और उसके बाद डीजल पर बहस होगी। लेकिन जब यह सवाल उठ गया है तो यह कहकर हमें इतनी देर से रोका जा रहा है कि आपने नोटिस नहीं दिया। लेकिन अपोजीशन लीडर और प्रधान मंत्री जी और सारे नेताओं के बीच यह फैसला हुआ है। उसके बाद हमारे यहां के माननीय सदस्यों की भी इच्छा थी, लेकिन मैंने सब को रोका। इसलिए हमें कुछ लोग नियमावली यहां न पढ़ायें। एक तो निवेदन आपसे है कि हमने पहले दिन ही कहा था कि अगर संरक्षण हमें नहीं मिलेगा तो संरक्षण लेने के लिए हम कुछ भी करने के लिए सदन में तैयार होंगे, चाहे आप हमारी सदस्यता ले लें। जहां तक बोफोर्स का सवाल है, बोफोर्स से हमारा सवाल जुड़ा हुआ है। हमने इसके लिए संघर्ष किया, जनता के बीच संघर्ष किया। आज जो रिपोर्ट आई है, सी.बी.आई. जैसी जांच करती है, उस पर मुझे कोई टिप्पणी नहीं करनी लेकिन हमारी राय में ऐसा भी हुआ है कि बहुत से अपराधी या मुल्िजम या रिश्वत खाने वाले बचे हैं, इसलिए सारी पत्रावली के साथ, चूंकि देश की सुरक्षा का सवाल है, इसलिए पूरे विस्तार से, इस सत्र में नहीं, अलग से एक दिन का, दो दिन का सत्र बुलाकर इस पर विस्तार से चर्चा होनी चाहिए। सारे देश की सुरक्षा से जुड़े हुए सवालों को लेकर हमारी नश्िचत राय है, मत है कि कुछ लोग बच गये हैं। यह तभी सम्भव हो सकेगा, कितने गहरे इसके किस्से थे, बहुत सारे केस मामूली होते हैं, एक कानून के दायरे से बिना सबूत के भी कभी-कभी ३०२ का मुजरिम बच जाता है, लेकिन ऐसे भी लोग हैं, जिनकी चर्चा थी कि कितनी गहरी किसकी दोस्ती है और कौन कहां का रहने वाला है, कया सम्बन्ध हैं, कया किसकी सारी चीजें हैं, यह सारा का सारा, कितने यह रोके हुए हैं। हम चाहते हैं कि यह देश की सुरक्षा से जुड़ा हुआ सवाल है इसलिए इस पर विस्तार से चर्चा होनी चाहिए। उस वकत हम और विस्तार से अपनी बात रखना चाहेंगे, कयोंकि हमने इसके लिए एक साल नहीं, १९८७ से लेकर १९८९ तक संघर्ष किया है। लेकिन कितना कौन लोकप्रिय था, इस पर हम बहस नहीं करना चाहते और जब कोई एक हमारे बीच नहीं है, हमारे भी उनके साथ रिश्ते अच्छे थे, लेकिन लोकप्रियता का कोई सवाल नहीं है। सवाल है, बेईमानी का, भ्रष्टाचार का और सुरक्षा का, इसलिए हम इसमें चाहते हैं कि इस पर विस्तार से चर्चा होनी चाहिए। और विस्तार से चर्चा होनी चाहिए।... (व्यवधान) अध्यक्ष महोदय : आप बैठिये, प्लीज़। श्री मुलायम सिंह यादव : ये जवाब दें। आप रोकिये इनको। मैं नहीं बोला हूं। ... (व्यवधान)SHRI P.H. PANDIAN : Kindly permit me to mention my view point. ... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: Nothing will go on record except what Shri Mulayam Singh says.
(Interruptions) ... (Not recorded) MR. SPEAKER: Shri Somnath Chatterjee, please. श्री मुलायम सिंह यादव : नहीं-नहीं, अभी हमारी पूरी बात होनी चाहिए। अध्यक्ष महोदय : आपकी बात हो गई ?Shri Chatterjee, would you please take your seat? Shri Mulayam Singh has not completed his speech. श्री मुलायम सिंह यादव : मुझे बीच में रोक दिया। अध्यक्ष महोदय : नहीं, आप समाप्त करिए न। श्री मुलायम सिंह यादव : मैं समाप्त ही कर रहा हूं। मैं जो कहना चाहता था, इन्होंने भुला दिया। हम आपसे अपील करते हैं कि यह रक्षा सम्बन्धी, सुरक्षा सम्बन्धी सवाल है, अगर इसे चार्जशीट के नाम पर या अदालत के नाम पर यहीं बातचीत करके छोड़ देंगे तो उचित नहीं होगा। इस सदन को पूरा अधिकार है कि जो लोग बच गए हैं, उनको भी शामिल किया जाए। इसलिए हम चाहते हैं कि इस पर चर्चा हो। दूसरी बात यह है कि इस सत्र में इतना समय नहीं है इसलिए इस मामले के लिए कम से कम दो दिन का विशेष सत्र बुलाया जाए और विस्तार से चर्चा हो। अभी जो युद्ध समाप्त हुआ है, ये लोग कहते हैं कि घुसपैठिये थे, हम कहना चाहते हैं कि वे घुसपैठिए नहीं थे, सीधे-सीधे पाकिस्तान का हम पर हमला था। इसलिए मैं इस बात की अपील करता हूं कि बोफोर्स का इश्यू हमारे लिए एक इमोशनल सवाल है। इसको लेकर हम लोगों पर लाठीचार्ज हुआ है, हम जेलों में बंद हुए हैं, हमने बड़ा संघर्ष किया है। केवल कांग्रेस पार्टी और सरकार नूरा कुश्ती लड़कर हमें छोड़ दे, यह नहीं हो सकता। इसलिए मेरा निवेदन है कि इस सवाल पर विशेष सत्र बुलाकर विस्तार से चर्चा की जाए।SHRI P.H. PANDIAN : Sir, let me make a mention.
MR. SPEAKER: I have called Somnath Babu. श्री रघुनाथ झा : हम लोगों को भी सुनिए। अध्यक्ष महोदय: जरूर सुनेंगे।
SHRI SOMNATH CHATTERJEE (BOLPUR): Mr. Speaker Sir, so far as we are concerned, our stand is very clear that the law must take its own course. This is a matter on which naturally the country is very much agitated. We had, as a matter of fact, even resigned from the House. Therefore, we are not minimising the importance of this matter. The only thing that we have noticed today is that materials which formed a part of the present charge-sheet were available with the Government for quite some time. Nothing new has come to the possession of the Government. As a matter of fact, the earlier Government had not decided to proceed further until the last batch of documents were made available which are now still with the Swiss authorities because it was apprehended that there were many other persons, some names are obviously known, who are suspected to be involved. Their complicity or their participation in whatever may have happened was likely to come out of this document. Therefore, when these materials were available with the document all along even with the previous Government, even the present Government which was then in the opposition had not insisted piecemeal filing of the charge-sheet. It was never suggested. Therefore, until and unless those documents came, why suddenly the Government decides to proceed with the charge-sheet which is apparently not a complete charge-sheet?
What we felt is whether the Government has anything in its mind to protect somebody, some highly placed persons who may have now made up with the ruling party or the ruling combination. They are very powerful people, known to be very powerful, very affluent people also. Therefore, I think the Government owes an explanation as to why this bifurcation of the charge-sheet, why suddenly as soon as the results are out, as soon as the Government is constituted, without any new material, they come and submit this charge-sheet.
I am not holding brief for anybody who is mentioned there as an accused. My party is not concerned. As I said, we insist that the law must take its course. Now the matter is before the court, whether the court takes cognizance....(Interruptions)
You need not support me. You are already interrupting others. I found that on the first day itself. Kindly spare us. I do not know you.
Therefore, what we are concerned with is, while trying to denigrate `A" or trying to bolster `A", let something not be done to protect anybody; nothing should be done which will interfere with the course of justice and which also will not give an impression of any political vendetta.
Our position is this. Therefore, we say that the judiciary may decide this matter in accordance with the law and the Government must make the commitment that without any political vendetta, they would try to find out the real situation. They must tell the House today, since the matter has come up, as to when the next portion of the charge-sheet would be coming than merely leaving it to some political appeal that is pending somewhere. In that case, why cannot they wait for another five to ten days? Why could not they wait? Then it could have been a complete charge-sheet. That is why, there is suspicion in the minds of some people that the reasons may be something else. It is the Government"s responsibility to disabuse the people"s apprehensions in this matter...(Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: This is not a discussion. Please understand it. The Government is going to reply to this.
... (Interruptions)
SHRI P.H. PANDIAN : Sir, there is no provision under Criminal Procedure Code to launch a prosecution against a corpse or a dead person. Even under the provision of Section 173, it cannot be done. Moreover, two Ministers have come out with a statement outside the House. The Home Minister said that he was keeping the charge-sheet in abeyance for the last two months. Now he has permitted the CBI to file the charge-sheet before the court. Under what provision of law is the Home Minister or the Prime Minister authorised to withhold the chargesheet for two months? In 1998, in Jain hawala case, the Supreme Court has held that no Minister can interfere in any investigation and no Minister can control the CBI. That is pending and that has to be executed. This is quite important. The House should be apprised of the legal position.
The former Prime Minister, Mr. Rajiv Gandhi is dead. It is not a writ proceeding; it is not a civil proceeding. It is a criminal proceeding. If he is arraigned as an accused, then he will be undefended. There is nobody to defend him. Your prosecutor will prosecute the other accused persons but if they shift the blame to the former Prime Minister, who is going to defend him? So, the deletion of the name of the former Prime Minister who happened to be the Leader of the Opposition is essential under the mandate of law. It is against the canons of principles of criminal law....(Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: Please take your seat. You have had your say.
SHRI A.C. JOSE (MUKUNDOURAM): Sir, he has not given notice....(Interruptions)
SHRI P.H. PANDIAN : Why should I withdraw?...(Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: I have received all the notices given by Members.
... (Interruptions)
SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU (SRIKAKULAM): The TDP Members had resigned from the Lok Sabha on this issue...(Interruptions)
SHRI P.H. PANDIAN : These are the materials which should be placed before the House. In 1990, one of the witnesses cited in the prosecution was Mr. Ram. He moved the Madras High Court and obtained a stay of anticipatory search warrant. He first got the stay of anticipatory search in Delhi High Court and then he got the stay in the Madras High Court. I appeared and intervened but it is still pending for the last ten years. The stay is not vacated. So, he has been cited as a prosecution witness. The political part of this prosecution after the death of a person and launching the prosecution against a corpse is against all canons of criminal law in the whole world. Latin maxim says `actio personalis mortua cum persona"". Criminal action dies with the person. Civil action may survive. Since he is dead, his name should be removed from the list of the accused.
MR. SPEAKER: Please take your seat.
SHRI P.H. PANDIAN : Sir, I have come here to place my facts. Otherwise, I would not have entered this House. I sacrificed my profession and came here.
I have come to this House to make some contribution for the country. I have come to this House sacrificing my profession and I am here...(Interruptions) Under Section 173 of the Criminal Procedure Code, there is no provision for taking action against a dead person...(Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: Nothing will go on record. Only Shri Yerrannaidu"s speech will go on record.
(Interruptions)* MR. SPEAKER: Let him finish it. What is this? Shri Pandian, how much time will you take? Please finish it.
SHRI P.H. PANDIAN : I will finish it.
MR. SPEAKER: There are other Members also to speak. Please understand it. You are not the only Member to speak. What is this?
SHRI P.H. PANDIAN :I will finish it. There is only one Member in the House to speak now.
MR. SPEAKER: Please understand that there are 543 Members in this House. You are not the only Member to speak.
SHRI P.H. PANDIAN : I will finish it in a minute...(Interruptions) They are interrupting me. They are blocking my mind.
MR. SPEAKER: Please conclude now.
SHRI P.H. PANDIAN : Under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, a final chargesheet has been filed. There are various clauses but there is no clause for taking action against a dead person...(Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: Shri Pandian, you have already mentioned these points. What is this? Again, you are repeating the points. Please take your seat.
... (Interruptions)
____________________________________________________________________________ *Not recorded.
SHRI P.H. PANDIAN : All right, Sir.
SHRI K. YERRANNAIDU :Mr. Speaker, Sir, from the very beginning, the TDP is opposing corruption. On the corruption issue, in the Ninth Lok Sabha, the TDP Members resigned. The law will take its own course. After twelve years, the CBI investigated everything and filed a chargesheet in the court of law. Now, the matter is pending in the court. The court will decide about the merits of this issue. This is not a court to hear the argument. Anyhow, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition has raised this issue. The Government has agreed to have a discussion in this House. So, we are accepting that. If the Government decides about it and whenever it comes up with a discussion, we will participate in the discussion on this issue.
MR. SPEAKER: Now, Shri Arun Jaitley to reply.
THE MINISTER OF STATE OF THE MINISTRY OF INFORMATION AND BROADCASTING (SHRI ARUN JAITLEY): Mr. Speaker, Sir...(Interruptions)
SHRI A.C. JOSE : Mr. Speaker, Sir, is he the Home Minister?...(Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: The Government is responding. Please take your seat. What is this?
... (Interruptions)
SHRI A.C. JOS : We are discussing an important matter. Therefore, the Home Minister should respond to it...(Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: You cannot prevent the Government from replying. What is this? Please take your seat. The Government is responding to it.
SHRI PRIYA RANJAN DASMUNSI : Sir, propriety demands that the Home Minister should reply to it...(Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: I am appealing to you to take your seat.
... (Interruptions)
SHRI PRAMOD MAHAJAN: Sir, the CBI is not under the Home Minister. Let them first study the Ministry position. The CBI is under the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister has given directions to Shri Arun Jaitley to reply on behalf of the Government. So, they cannot force that the Home Minister should reply...(Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: This is too much.
... (Interruptions)
SHRI PRAMOD MAHAJAN: They cannot force the Government on this issue...(Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: I am appealing to you to take your seat. I have not allowed anybody to speak.
(Interruptions)* SHRI PRAMOD MAHAJAN: Shri Munsi, it has got nothing to do with the Home Ministry...(Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: Nothing will go on record.
(Interruptions) * SHRI P.H. PANDIAN (TIRUNELVELI): As the Additional Solicitor General, he has appeared in this case in 1997-98...(Interruptions)
_____________________________________________________________________________ *Not recorded.
MR. SPEAKER: Hon. Members, please take your seat. This is too much. .. (व्यवधान)MR. SPEAKER: Please take your seat.
SHRI L.K. ADVANI: Mr. Speaker, Sir, I am rising only because Shri Priya Ranjan Dasmunshi has raised an issue. (Interruptions)
SHRI BUTA SINGH (JALORE): Mr. Speaker, he appeared as the prosecutor and so, he should not be allowed to make a statement here.
MR. SPEAKER: Shri Buta Singh, please take your seat.
SHRI L.K. ADVANI: Sir, I am rising only because the hon. Member, Shri Priya Ranjan Dasmunshi has raised an issue. Normally, anyone can reply on behalf of the Government, but in this case, perhaps, Shri Dasmunshi is not aware that this particular department, C.B.I., is with the Prime Minister and not with the Home Minister. So, the Prime Minister has directed Shri Arun Jaitley to reply to this issue. I have no objection and I can reply to this issue. Since the Prime Minister has directed Shri Jaitley to reply to this issue and also since this will be his maiden speech in the House, the tradition is that the maiden speech is never interrupted. (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: Nothing will go on record.
(Interruptions)* MR. SPEAKER: Shri Dasmunshi, please ask your Members to take their seats.
SHRI MADHAVRAO SCINDIA : Mr. Speaker, Sir, I would just like to stress the point that I have also been a Member of Parliament for many years now. This is a matter of propriety. We are dealing with an issue involving the former Prime Minister. This particular portfolio is also handled by the present Prime Minister himself. So, it would be appropriate, according to propriety of the House and also it would be the minimum courtesy that the Government ____________________________________________________________________________ *Not Recorded.
could show to the Opposition, if the hon. Prime Minister could respond to us. We are not insisting that he should respond immediately. But at an appropriate time, whenever he chooses to do so, let the Prime Minister respond to us. This is the minimum courtesy that we are asking from the Government.
SHRI L.K. ADVANI: Sir, this is not a regular debate. It has been raised during `Zero Hour" and, with your permission, submissions have been made by the main Opposition Party and also by other Opposition parties.
12.00 hrs. In fairness, the Government"s response should also be heard today. If there is a fullfledged debate, I can understand the Prime Minister being asked to reply. But the matter has been raised during `Zero Hour". ... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: No, no. Please let him complete. ... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: What is this? Please take your seat.
... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: Please take your seat first. What is this?
SHRI A.C. JOS : How can a junior Minister reply?
MR. SPEAKER: No, no; please take your seat. There is no question of a junior or a senior Minister.
... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: Shri Jos, what is this? Let him complete.
... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER:Please take your seat.
SHRI L.K. ADVANI: I am told that a notice was given under Rule 193 for a debate. We would be very happy and the Government would be very happy if the entire issue of Bofors and the charge-sheet are discussed. ... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: Let him complete. What is this? Why are you objecting to it?
... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: Now, please take your seats.
SHRI L.K. ADVANI: When that debate comes, naturally, the House would expect that the Cabinet Minister in charge of the CBI replies to the debate.
SHRI A.C. JOS : We want the name to be deleted.
SHRI L.K. ADVANI: In this particular case, the Prime Minister has specifically asked Shri Arun Jaitley to reply to it. I would plead with you that the Government"s response to the debate should be heard. ... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: Shri Arun Jaitley.
... (Interruptions)
SOME HON. MEMBERS: No, no. ... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER:Nothing will go on record except what Shri Arun Jaitley says.
(Interruptions)* SHRI ARUN JAITLEY: Sir, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition has raised two vital points. His first vital point is that he has a serious objection to the addition of the name of a particular person in Column 2 of the charge-sheet.
In his second point, he says that the Government must take steps to delete that name altogether. ... (Interruptions)
The Deputy Leader of the Opposition has said that he wants the law to take its own course. Other Members, particularly, Shri Chatterjee, have also raised a question that the law must take its own course.
After nine-year investigation by the CBI, the CBI registered the first information report. The CBI conducted the investigation. After conducting the investigation, the CBI has finally filed an interim charge-sheet. ... (Interruptions) The Deputy Leader of the Opposition was insisting that the law must take its own course. ... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER:Please understand that you have asked the Government to reply. When the Government is giving a reply, you are objecting to it. What is this? ... (Interruptions)
______________________________________________________________________________ *Not recorded.
MR. SPEAKER: This is not good. You have asked the Government to reply.
... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: Why have you asked the Government to reply?
... (Interruptions) श्री अरुण जेटली: मणिशंकर अय्यर जी कह रहे थे कि जब वह बोलते हैं तो हमें एतराज नहीं होना चाहिए। अपनी रुकावट पर एतराज था तो मैं जो चार बातें कहना चाहता हूं, उस पर एतराज किस बात का है?... (व्यवधान)
अध्यक्ष जी, विपक्ष के उपनेता ने कहा कि कानून को अपनी प्रक़िया पूरी करनी चाहिए। कानून बड़ा स्पष्ट है। सरकार को यह अधिकार नहीं है कि जो एकयूज्ड हैं, उनकी सूची में किसी का नाम जोड़े और किसी का नाम निकाले।
... (व्यवधान)
When the Deputy Leader says that the law must take its own course, the law is very clear. ... (Interruptions) It is not the Government of the day which has to decide the names of the accused.
It is for the Investigating agency to do so... (Interruptions) The law is equally clear that when a chargesheet is presented in the court, it is for any person to approach the court for the purposes of deleting or adding the name of any accused. It is now under the supervision of the court, for any person aggrieved, the appropriate forum is the court, the Government of the day is not competent to take any action... (Interruptions)
Secondly, Shri Pandian has raised an objection as to why the name of the deceased person is in Column 2. This is not the first time that this has happened... (Interruptions) Every time that there is an accused who is deceased, his name is always added in Column 2. In Shrimati Gandhi"s assassination case, Beant Singh who was killed on the spot, was an accused but his name was in Column 2. In Rajivji"s assassination case, Dhanu, the humanbomb lady who actually killed Rajivji, died on the spot but she was an accused and her name was in Column 2. There is no rule, jurisprudence that the Congress Party or anybody can direct the investigating agency to delete the names in this case. The past precedents are absolutely clear that the name of the accused who is deceased, is always carried in Column 2. This is not for the first time that this has happened ... (Interruptions)
SHRI PRIYA RANJAN DASMUNSHI : Sir, we are not satisfied with this. We are walking out in protest... (Interruptions)
12.07 hrs (At this stage, Shri Priya Ranjan Dasmunshi and some other hon. Members left the House.) SHRI ARUN JAITELY: Mr. Speaker Sir, the various questions which have been raised... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: I have not allowed you, Shri Pandian. Please take your seat.
SHRI P.H PANDIAN : People have sent me to speak here... (Interruptions) श्री मदन लाल खुराना (दिल्ली सदर) : अध्यक्ष महोदय, सारा हाउस शान्ित से सुनना चाहता है, देश सुनना चाहता है। इसलिये मैं निवेदन करूंगा कि मंत्री जी का स्टेटमेंट शान्ित से पूरा होने दें।SHRI ARUN JAITELY: Mr. Speaker Sir, let me clarify the objection which has been raised... (Interruptions)
SHRI P.H PANDIAN : Sir, before walking out, I want to make a statement... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: I am not allowing you, please.
... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: This will not go on record.
(Interruptions)* MR. SPEAKER: Shri Pandian, please take your seat.
... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: I have not allowed you. Please take your seat.
... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: This will not go on record.
(Interruptions) * SHRI P.H. PANDIAN (TIRUNELVELI): We are walking out of the House... (Interruptions)
______________________________________________________________________________ *Not recorded.
12.09 hrs (At this stage, Shri P.H. Pandian and some other hon. Members left the House.) ... (Interruptions)
MR. SPEAKER: Order please.
SHRI ARUN JAITELY: Mr. Speaker Sir, an objection was raised with regard to an earlier capacity in which I have been associated with the initial investigation of this case. I am fully aware of that limitation. I am therefore, not going to refer to any fact which has come to my notice in that capacity. I am only meeting some objections which the Deputy-Leader of Opposition had raised. He was fair enough to say that the law must take its own course and the law in this country is very clear.
It is not the Government of the day, either in the Centre or in the State, which has to decide who should be a particular accused in a case or otherwise. It is the investigating agency, the investigating officer and only the investigating officer who has an authority to decide this.
Our courts have very clearly ruled that no Government, no Minister has the power to add or delete an accused.
When Shri Scindia raised objection that the law must take its own course, he must be aware that the law very clearly is that the investigating officer is satisfied as to who are the category of persons as column 1 accused; who are the persons to be named in column 2; and, therefore, it is that investigation of the investigating officer which is final. If anybody is aggrieved, the remedy is that he goes to court; he challenges it before the court; he takes appropriate legal steps before the court. It will be a sad day if, on the basis of a political discussion, the Centre and the State Governments started adding or deleting accused persons. This has never been the law in this country. It should not be the law in this country.
The second objection which has been raised--Shri Pandian has raised --it is whether there is any precedent that a dead person can be added as an accused in a case. A person who is unfortunately dead can certainly not be put up for trial. There can be no trial of that person. He cannot be put up for any punishment, but because of his some erstwhile association he may have had with the offence that had taken place, the past practice has always been that his name has been put in column 2. For good legal reasons there is column 2 in the chargesheet. The chargesheet is filed under section 173 of the CrPC. It is a statutory proforma, which has column 2. The past practice has always been that a deceased accused is put in the category of column 2; you are an accused but you are not being put up for trial.
I have with me some particulars. Unfortunately when Mrs. Gandhi was assassinated, one of the assassins, who was the chief conspirator, was Beant Singh and he was killed on the spot. On the analogy that Beant Singh was dead, his name should never have been in the chargesheet. Beant Singh's name was appropriately put in column 2. Similarly, when Rajivji himself was assassinated, one of the accused persons, was the lady, Dhanu, who was a human bomb who died on the spot. She was the key conspirator; her name could never be put up for trial because she was dead but her name was put in column 2. So, the past practice has always been that whenever there is a deceased accused, under section 173 when a chargesheet is filed, the deceased accused is not put up for trial but because of his role or some evidence relating to his conduct, motive or participation earlier, he is always there in the case as an accused in column 2. This has always been the past practice. Merely because somebody is politically influential and very powerful, his supporters today are influential, it will be a very sad day for jurisprudence if it is said that now we make a new beginning and even if the person was associated with the crime, because he is no more we do away with this practice. If you do away with this practice, then under the Evidence Act you must also have to do away with the leading evidence relating to his motive, participation earlier and subsequent conduct which has never been done.
A very valid point was raised by Shri Mulayam Singh. मैं इस बात का आश्वासन उनको दे दूं कि यह जो पार्ट चार्जशीट फाइल हुई है, वह इसलिए फाइल हुई है... (व्यवधान) श्री सोमनाथ चटर्जी : मैंने भी उठाया। श्री अरुण जेटली : सोमनाथ जी ने भी उठाया कि एक सेट ऑफ ऐकयूज्ड ऐसे हैं जिन्होंने विदेशों के अंदर अपनी अपीलें फाइल की हुई थीं। पहले की उनकी जितनी भी कानूनी अपीलें थीं, वह इस साल १७ अगस्त को डिसमिस हो चुकी हैं। उनकी आखिरी पोलटिकल अपील बाकी है। सारे दस्तावेज़ सी.बी.आई. के पास आ चुके हैं। एक सेट ऑफ दस्तावेज़ सी.बी.आई. के पास अभी आने हैं, उनकी कानूनी अपील खारिज हो चुकी है। राजनीतिक अपील के बाद, उसके लिए प्रतीक्षा करें या न करें, पार्ट चार्जशीट दें, सप्लीमेंटरी चार्जशीट दें, यह दुर्भाग्यपूर्ण होगा कि यह निर्णय सरकार करने लगे। अगर सरकार केन्द्र में ऐसा करेगी तो कल प्रांतों में जितनी सरकारें हैं, कयोंकि स्टेट पुलिस स्टेट के पास हैं, तो फिर बिहार की सरकार तय करेगी कि फॉडर केस में किसके खिलाफ चार्जशीट फाइल हो या न हो। कल को तमिलनाडु के मुख्य मंत्री तय करेंगे न कि इनवेस्िटगेटिंग ऑफिसर। यह कानूनी राय है, इनवेस्िटगेटिंग एजेन्सी की राय है और राजनीतिक पक्ष को, सरकार को उसमें हस्तक्षेप नहीं करना चाहिए। मैं केवल इस बात का आश्वासन आपको दे दूं कि जितनी भी जांच होगी और जो भी ऐकयूज़ड इसमें हैं, चाहे कितने भी पॉवरफुल और इनफलुएंशियल कयों न हों, प्रभावित नहीं कर सकेंगे। उनकी शकित इतनी थी कि सन् १९८६ में सारा कांड हुआ, १९८७ में सामने आया और दिसंबर १९८९ तक जब तक कांग्रेस पार्टी की सरकार थी, एफ.आई.आर. भी दर्ज नहीं हुई। जब जनवरी १९९० में एफ.आई.आर. दर्ज हुई, ऐकाउंटस फ्रीज़ हुए, बार-बार अपील फाइल की गई। दुनिया में बहुत कम उदाहरण हैं कि स्िवस बैंकों की सीक़ेसी को तोड़कर इस प्रकार के दस्तावेज़ आ जाएं कि ये अकाउंटस किसके बेनफिट के लिए थे। पैसे का मूवमैंट कैसे हुआ है, इंफलुएंशियल लोगों की अपील और ऐतराज के बावजूद सी.बी.आई. ने अभी तक जो जांच की है यह उसके अनुसार है और मैं इस बात का आश्वासन दे दूं कि जितने भी इसमें एकयूज्ड हैं जिनकी पोलिटीकल अपील्स फैडरल काउंसिल में पैंडिंग भी होंगी, उसमेंबहुत अधिक समय नहीं लगेगा, लेकिन उसकी सीमा हम नहीं बांध सकते, कयोंकि कागज वहां से आने हैं और वहां कया वाकयात होते हैं, वहां की फैडरल काउंसिल इसमें कया राय लेती है, उसके ऊपर निर्भर करेगा। जो लोग कहते हैं कि कानून अपनी दिशा खुद तय करेगा, तो कानून की दिशा बड़ी स्पष्ट है। इन्वेस्िटंग एजेन्सी ने यह रिपोर्ट बनाई है, राजनैतिक सरकार इसे नहीं रोक सकती... (व्यवधान)
जहां तक चर्चा का संबंध है, मैं स्पष्ट कर दूं कि कांग्रेस पार्टी के मेरे मित्र एक नारे के रूप में इसे खड़ा कर लें, लेकिन वे बहस और चर्चा नहीं करना चाहते, कयोंकि चर्चा में वह सचाई सामने आयेगी जो बड़ी कड़वी भी हो सकती है और बड़ी एम्बैरेसिंग भी हो सकती है।
SHRI SOMNATH CHATTERJEE : He has not replied to the main thing. श्री अरुण जेटली: एडजर्नमैंट मोशन, रिजोल्यूशन मोशन, नियम १९३ इतने अधिकार आपके पास हैं, अगर चाहें तो किसी भी नियम के तहत इस पर लम्बी बहस के लिए भी हम पूरी तरह से तैयार हैं।
SHRIMATI GEETA MUKHERJEE (PANSKURA): Our attitude towards this Bofors case is well-known because all of us had resigned on that question protesting against what that Government did with Bofors. We do stand by the same stand that we took at that time. But I would like to know why has the Minister not replied to this question raised by Shri Somnath Chatterjee because everybody knows Hindujas name was there and then the whole report has not come. So, what would have happened if it has been done after 10 days or so, so that they would get the whole report which they are expecting? Then a lot of troubles could have been avoided. Undoubtedly, the law will take its own course. But this question on Hindujas will remain in everybody"s mind. So, I would like to know why he has not answered question. श्री मुलायम सिंह यादव : यह इधर के भी दोस्त हैं और उधर के भी दोस्त हैं। यह चर्चा यहां आनी चाहिए कि दोस्ती कहां किसकी थी। ये सारी बातें चर्चा में होंगी। आप चर्चा को स्वीकार कर लीजिए। इनकी भी दोस्ती है, उनकी भी दोस्ती है और बहुत सारे ... (व्यवधान)
श्रीमान, चर्चा को स्वीकार कर लीजिए। बहुत बड़े लोगों की दोस्ती है ... (व्यवधान)
______