Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

SHRI L.K. ADVANI : ‘Even’ because you are supporting this Government; you are in alliance …… (Interruptions) SHRI BASU DEB ACHARIA : Not in alliance.

SHRI L.K. ADVANI : If any Party that was in alliance with NDA also protested about something, then it acquires a very important significance. That is all. I welcome the fact that you protested. Every section protested; so much so that I saw that the General Secretary of the CPI(M) Shri Prakash Karat told the Press that the Party strongly objected to a person being sent to London authorising the de-freezing of these accounts. Not only that, but after that Shri Sitaram Yechury had a one-hour meeting with Shrimati Sonia Gandhi, the Congress President to find out why it had happened. What was the answer given? Shrimati Sonia Gandhi, the Chairperson of the UPA told the Left Front that the Government had no advance knowledge of the CBI decision to allow the de-freezing of Ottavio Quttrocchi’s London bank accounts and we had no information. This is what Sonia Gandhiji told the Left Front. … (Interruptions) This meeting lasted one hour.             Not only that. The hon. Prime Minister is here. I have seen the hon. Prime Minister’s own statement. The hon. Prime Minister’s statement says : “The act of frreezing or de-freezing was not done at the behest of the Government. It fell strictly within the domain of the functional responsibility of the CBI which took the necessary steps going by the right legal advice”. So, it is attributed to the CBI that it has done whatever it has done.             I also find it strange that the CBI, just a couple of days before Shri Dutta left for London – Shri Dutta is the law officer who went to have the accounts defrozen – just two days before that, according to the court records, the CBI, on 20th December, 2005 said in the court of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Seema Maini : “To apprehend the accused” he is still an accused, “a red corner notice was still in existence and details of the present whereabouts of the accused would be submitted soon to the court”. Just a couple of days before these accounts are defrozen, the court is told that he is still a fugitive from the law and a red corner notice is still in existence against him.             Who is being misled? Is the court being misled or is Sonia Gandhiji misleading the Left Front or is the hon. Prime Minister misleading the country? … (Interruptions) MR. SPEAKER : That part is not on the Government’s responsibility, if some Member is misleading another Member. … (Interruptions)

SHRI L.K. ADVANI  : Sir, we do not know. … (Interruptions)

MR. SPEAKER : Please sit down. This is very wrong. I made a request to all of you.

… (Interruptions[krr8] ) MR. SPEAKER: There are competent hon. Ministers over here.

… (Interruptions)

SHRI L.K. ADVANI : The Law Minister is also here. The Law Minister virtually says that there is no evidence against Ottavio Quattrocchi. The Government on Thursday, the January 12 said that the CBI had found no evidence against the Italian businessman Ottavio Quattrocchi in the Bofors pay-off case and this was conveyed to the British Government. The Law Minister, Shri H.R. Bhardwaj, said that the Crown Prosecution of the British Government had, over the past two years, sought evidence against Quattrocchi and the British Government had frozen Quattrocchi's bank accounts. The British Government had not frozen his bank accounts on its own; it was on the request of the CBI that they had frozen these accounts in UK and offshore islands, on the India's request three years ago. The Crown Prosecution had sought the status of the investigations and we have conveyed to them the recent rulings of the High Court rejecting the case against the Hinduja brothers. Now, this is also another story.             Five different matters were decided in the High Court in favour of the various accused in the Bofors case. In three cases, the Government appealed to the Supreme Court and they were upturned. Only in two cases, the Government did not appeal. Even though the CBI wanted it to be appealed, the Government did not appeal. I would admit that my own Government, the NDA Government did not appeal because the case against Rajiv Gandhi was decided by the High Court in favour, exonerating Rajiv Gandhi, in February. Therefore, we did not appeal. We felt that the elections had been announced, let the new Government, whichever Government comes, decide and we did not decide. Then, their Government came. I do not want to comment on the High Court's judgement. There are judicial authorities whom I have heard commenting on that judgement, but they were the only two cases. … (Interruptions) MR. SPEAKER: That is not to be done.

MR. SPEAKER: Mr. Advani, I would kindly request you to conclude now.

SHRI L.K. ADVANI : In fact, after Mr. Quattrochi made his statement about his friendship with Shrimati Sonia Gandhi’s family, I had expected the Congress President to come out very forcefully and say that : “We would like no fugitive to remain away from the court of law.” After all Mr. Quattrochi … (Interruptions) MR. SPEAKER: Please refer to the Government.

SHRI L.K. ADVANI  : After all Mr. Quattrochi is no different in so far as avoiding law is concerned; in so far as red-corner notice is concerned; and in so far as being a fugitive is concerned. He is no different from Dawood Ibrahim for Mr. Quattrochi is another Dawood Ibrahim. So, there should be no one in the Government who has any soft corner for this kind of a fugitive. … (Interruptions) MR. SPEAKER: Next is Shri Prabhunath Singh.

MR. SPEAKER: Be ready to be named, Mr. Manvendra Singh. This has become your very bad habit. There is an end to patience.             I would request you now to conclude please. You have taken nearly 25 minutes.

SHRI L.K. ADVANI: Is it not true, Sir, that no officer of the Government, certainly not such a senior law officer like Mr. Dutta, can go to London without the permission of the Prime Minister? … (Interruptions) MR. SPEAKER: Incorrigible, some of you are.

SHRI L.K. ADVANI: Therefore, when the Prime Minister says that he has nothing to do with it, that he did not know, and that it is the decision by the CBI, and when the CBI tells the Court that Quattrocchi is still a fugitive, there is a Red Corner Notice against him, who is saying untruth? Who is misleading whom? MR. SPEAKER: Very well, just mention it. This is not a discussion on that. I have allowed you to speak for 20 minutes. SHRI L.K. ADVANI: Sometimes, these days, I believe that in the matter of probity, corruption, scandals, scams, accountability is the most important part. Who is accountable? We have a Volcker Report. MR. SPEAKER: We have seen that. It is becoming a general discussion. I have allowed you to speak for 20 minutes. Even omitting the interruptions, at least, you have had 20 minutes to speak. … (Interruptions)