CBI probe into Vanpic led to Singur-type situation

FanGuanto

Editor

posted on 12 years ago — updated on 1 second ago

37
views

Follow us:WhatsappFacebookTwitterTelegram.cls-1{fill:#4d4d4d;}.cls-2{fill:#fff;}Google NewsAlleging that CBI’s investigation into the Vanpic project was leading to complications, industrialist Nimmagadda Prasad has wondered as to how the investigation agency can question the decisions of the cabinet.Moreover, the action of the agency has led to a Singur-type situation and the political parties are trying to gain mileage from it, he has said.When Prasad’s bail petition came up for hearing before the special court for CBI cases here on Thursday, his counsel E Umamaheshwara Rao said his client came up with a module for business which was sanctioned by the cabinet.Pointing out that the CBI was investigating into the various aspects of the Vanpic project, Umamaheshwara Rao asked to how the investigation agency could question the decisions of the government.“Can they have such power to question cabinet decisions? Is it the law?’’ the defense counsel questioned. Stating that the probe was leading to complications, Umamaheshwara Rao said there was no litigation with respect to compensation to the lands acquired for the project.After the investigation, political parties were creating a situation like Singur (in West Bengal).“Mamata (Banerjee) got mileage and become the chief minister (there). Now the TDP would do the same,’’ he said adding that everybody was trying to take possession of the lands. Umamaheshwara Rao said political parties were taking advantage of the situation and the government was not in a position to save Prasad’s lands from getting occupied. He said it would create a financial burden on the state if the other partner (Ras Al Kaima) went for international arbitration.Further, the ties between the two sovereign nations would be affected.On the CBI stating that money was pumped into Kadapa MP YS Jagan Mohan Reddy’s companies as part of quid pro quo arrangement, the defence counsel said the agency cannot term it as quid pro quo as it was a commercial agreement.``The project itself is a quid pro quo between the government and the investors. As the government had no money, it was giving projects to investors. The benefits are not for free it is only if I invest Rs 17,000 crore,’’ Prasad said.With regard to Prasad’s mediation for Jagan’s companies to get investments from Maytas Infrastructure and Indu Projects, Umamaheshwara Rao said the CBI was exceeding its brief and was investigating into extraneous things.The investigating agency was still awaiting sanction of prosecution with respect to other accused public servants including minister Dharmana Prasad Rao and bureaucrats KV Brahmananda Reddy, M Samuel and Manmohan Singh.The defence counsel said it would be a protracted trial as more than 140 farmers had been listed as witnesses and prayed the court to grant bail to Nimmagadda Prasad.The matter was posted to further hearing for Friday.first published:August 24, 2012, 10:02 ISTlast updated:August 24, 2012, 10:02 IST
window._taboola = window._taboola || [];_taboola.push({mode: 'thumbnails-a', container: 'taboola-below-article-thumbnails', placement: 'Below Article Thumbnails', target_type: 'mix' });Latest News

Alleging that CBI’s investigation into the Vanpic project was leading to complications, industrialist Nimmagadda Prasad has wondered as to how the investigation agency can question the decisions of the cabinet.

Moreover, the action of the agency has led to a Singur-type situation and the political parties are trying to gain mileage from it, he has said.

When Prasad’s bail petition came up for hearing before the special court for CBI cases here on Thursday, his counsel E Umamaheshwara Rao said his client came up with a module for business which was sanctioned by the cabinet.

Pointing out that the CBI was investigating into the various aspects of the Vanpic project, Umamaheshwara Rao asked to how the investigation agency could question the decisions of the government.

“Can they have such power to question cabinet decisions? Is it the law?’’ the defense counsel questioned. Stating that the probe was leading to complications, Umamaheshwara Rao said there was no litigation with respect to compensation to the lands acquired for the project.

After the investigation, political parties were creating a situation like Singur (in West Bengal).

“Mamata (Banerjee) got mileage and become the chief minister (there). Now the TDP would do the same,’’ he said adding that everybody was trying to take possession of the lands. Umamaheshwara Rao said political parties were taking advantage of the situation and the government was not in a position to save Prasad’s lands from getting occupied. He said it would create a financial burden on the state if the other partner (Ras Al Kaima) went for international arbitration.

Further, the ties between the two sovereign nations would be affected.

On the CBI stating that money was pumped into Kadapa MP YS Jagan Mohan Reddy’s companies as part of quid pro quo arrangement, the defence counsel said the agency cannot term it as quid pro quo as it was a commercial agreement.

``The project itself is a quid pro quo between the government and the investors. As the government had no money, it was giving projects to investors. The benefits are not for free it is only if I invest Rs 17,000 crore,’’ Prasad said.

With regard to Prasad’s mediation for Jagan’s companies to get investments from Maytas Infrastructure and Indu Projects, Umamaheshwara Rao said the CBI was exceeding its brief and was investigating into extraneous things.

The investigating agency was still awaiting sanction of prosecution with respect to other accused public servants including minister Dharmana Prasad Rao and bureaucrats KV Brahmananda Reddy, M Samuel and Manmohan Singh.

The defence counsel said it would be a protracted trial as more than 140 farmers had been listed as witnesses and prayed the court to grant bail to Nimmagadda Prasad.

The matter was posted to further hearing for Friday.