Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]Code Context
trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);
}
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 73 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.' $stackFrame = (int) 1 $trace = [ (int) 0 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php', 'line' => (int) 2421, 'function' => 'deprecationWarning', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.' ] ], (int) 1 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php', 'line' => (int) 73, 'function' => 'offsetGet', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'catslug' ] ], (int) 2 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php', 'line' => (int) 610, 'function' => 'printArticle', 'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController', 'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ], (int) 3 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php', 'line' => (int) 120, 'function' => 'invokeAction', 'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller', 'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ], (int) 4 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php', 'line' => (int) 94, 'function' => '_invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {} ] ], (int) 5 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php', 'line' => (int) 235, 'function' => 'dispatch', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 6 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication', 'object' => object(App\Application) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 7 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 162, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 8 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 9 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 88, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 10 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 11 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 96, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 12 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 13 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 51, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 14 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php', 'line' => (int) 98, 'function' => 'run', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 15 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php', 'line' => (int) 39, 'function' => 'run', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ] ] $frame = [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php', 'line' => (int) 73, 'function' => 'offsetGet', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) { trustProxy => false [protected] params => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] cookies => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] _environment => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/vetting-of-coal-report-top-govt-law-officers-indulge-in-blame-game-ahead-of-sc-hearing-dhananjay-mahapatra-20796/print' [protected] base => '' [protected] webroot => '/' [protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/vetting-of-coal-report-top-govt-law-officers-indulge-in-blame-game-ahead-of-sc-hearing-dhananjay-mahapatra-20796/print' [protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] _input => null [protected] _detectors => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] _detectorCache => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {} [protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {} [protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {} [protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] emulatedAttributes => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] protocol => null [protected] requestTarget => null [private] deprecatedProperties => [ [maximum depth reached] ] }, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'catslug' ] ]deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311 Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421 App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 73 Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51 Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98
Deprecated (16384): The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php. [CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311]Code Context
trigger_error($message, E_USER_DEPRECATED);
}
$message = 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead. - /home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line: 74 You can disable deprecation warnings by setting `Error.errorLevel` to `E_ALL & ~E_USER_DEPRECATED` in your config/app.php.' $stackFrame = (int) 1 $trace = [ (int) 0 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ServerRequest.php', 'line' => (int) 2421, 'function' => 'deprecationWarning', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'The ArrayAccess methods will be removed in 4.0.0.Use getParam(), getData() and getQuery() instead.' ] ], (int) 1 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php', 'line' => (int) 74, 'function' => 'offsetGet', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'artileslug' ] ], (int) 2 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Controller/Controller.php', 'line' => (int) 610, 'function' => 'printArticle', 'class' => 'App\Controller\ArtileDetailController', 'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ], (int) 3 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php', 'line' => (int) 120, 'function' => 'invokeAction', 'class' => 'Cake\Controller\Controller', 'object' => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ], (int) 4 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php', 'line' => (int) 94, 'function' => '_invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(App\Controller\ArtileDetailController) {} ] ], (int) 5 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/BaseApplication.php', 'line' => (int) 235, 'function' => 'dispatch', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 6 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\BaseApplication', 'object' => object(App\Application) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 7 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 162, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 8 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 9 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 88, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 10 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 11 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php', 'line' => (int) 96, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 12 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 65, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware', 'object' => object(Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {} ] ], (int) 13 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Runner.php', 'line' => (int) 51, 'function' => '__invoke', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 14 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Http/Server.php', 'line' => (int) 98, 'function' => 'run', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Runner', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Runner) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\Http\MiddlewareQueue) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\Http\Response) {} ] ], (int) 15 => [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/webroot/index.php', 'line' => (int) 39, 'function' => 'run', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\Server', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\Server) {}, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [] ] ] $frame = [ 'file' => '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php', 'line' => (int) 74, 'function' => 'offsetGet', 'class' => 'Cake\Http\ServerRequest', 'object' => object(Cake\Http\ServerRequest) { trustProxy => false [protected] params => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] data => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] query => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] cookies => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] _environment => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] url => 'latest-news-updates/vetting-of-coal-report-top-govt-law-officers-indulge-in-blame-game-ahead-of-sc-hearing-dhananjay-mahapatra-20796/print' [protected] base => '' [protected] webroot => '/' [protected] here => '/latest-news-updates/vetting-of-coal-report-top-govt-law-officers-indulge-in-blame-game-ahead-of-sc-hearing-dhananjay-mahapatra-20796/print' [protected] trustedProxies => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] _input => null [protected] _detectors => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] _detectorCache => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] stream => object(Zend\Diactoros\PhpInputStream) {} [protected] uri => object(Zend\Diactoros\Uri) {} [protected] session => object(Cake\Http\Session) {} [protected] attributes => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] emulatedAttributes => [ [maximum depth reached] ] [protected] uploadedFiles => [[maximum depth reached]] [protected] protocol => null [protected] requestTarget => null [private] deprecatedProperties => [ [maximum depth reached] ] }, 'type' => '->', 'args' => [ (int) 0 => 'artileslug' ] ]deprecationWarning - CORE/src/Core/functions.php, line 311 Cake\Http\ServerRequest::offsetGet() - CORE/src/Http/ServerRequest.php, line 2421 App\Controller\ArtileDetailController::printArticle() - APP/Controller/ArtileDetailController.php, line 74 Cake\Controller\Controller::invokeAction() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 610 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 120 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51 Cake\Http\Server::run() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 98
Warning (512): Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853 [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48]Code Contextif (Configure::read('debug')) {
trigger_error($message, E_USER_WARNING);
} else {
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) { 'status' => (int) 200, 'contentType' => 'text/html', 'headers' => [ 'Content-Type' => [ [maximum depth reached] ] ], 'file' => null, 'fileRange' => [], 'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {}, 'cacheDirectives' => [], 'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr68144e090d0de-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr68144e090d0de-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr68144e090d0de-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr68144e090d0de-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr68144e090d0de-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr68144e090d0de-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr68144e090d0de-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr68144e090d0de-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">> </span></span></code> <span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000"> <link rel="canonical" href="<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">); </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>/<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>.html"/> </span></code></span> <code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"> </span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type" </span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html; charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/> </span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr68144e090d0de-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp' $dataForView = [ 'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 20652, 'title' => 'Vetting of coal report: Top govt law officers indulge in blame game ahead of SC hearing -Dhananjay Mahapatra', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div align="justify"> -The Times of India </div> <p align="justify"> <br /> Less than 24 hours before the Supreme Court takes up the coal scam hearing on Tuesday, a blame game broke out within the government over who was responsible for incorrectly telling the court that the CBI had not shared the contents of its status report on &quot; Coalgate&quot; with the political executive. </p> <p align="justify"> In a four-page letter to attorney general Goolam Vahanvati, additional solicitor general Harin Raval said he had been made a &quot;scapegoat&quot; for informing the court that the March 8 CBI status report had not been shared with the political executive even though it was the attorney general who gave that statement to the court first. </p> <p align="justify"> Raval said after the highest law officer had given a statement to the court on March 12 that the probe status report was not shown to the government, he had no option but to &quot;embarrassingly&quot; stick to the same argument. </p> <p align="justify"> He told Vahanvati that the latter too was present in the meeting at the law minister's office where the alleged vetting of the coal scam investigation status report took place prior to its filing in the Supreme Court. The ASG alleged that despite having full knowledge of the probe status report, the AG decided to tell the court on March 12 that he had no knowledge of it. </p> <p align="justify"> The letter, with a copy marked to beleaguered law minister Ashwani Kumar, stunned the AG. When contacted by TOI for his response, Vahanvati said, &quot;I am extremely upset to receive it a day before the hearing in the Supreme Court. It is very unfortunate. I never informed the court that it was not shared with the political executive. When the court asked whether I had a copy of the report, I said no. I still do not have a copy of it and we responded to the CBI's allegation on the basis of the court informing that the agency prima facie found that there was no basis or rationale behind the coal block allocations.&quot; </p> <p align="justify"> The public display of differences came on a day when government, feeling the pressure of opposition's protest against interference with CBI's investigation, swiftly moved to bring forward the date for the passage of the budget in Lok Sabha to Tuesday to guard against the possibility of a major mishap. The budget was set to be passed over two days beginning May 6. Sources attributed the sudden switch of dates to &quot;caution&quot; on the part of parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath to ensure that the finance bill was not stuck in case Parliament had to be adjourned abruptly. </p> <p align="justify"> The public feuding between the law officers erupted when the government was bracing for the crucial SC hearing on Tuesday on whether law minister Ashwani Kumar, the PMO and the coal ministry sought to subvert CBI's investigation into 'Coalgate'. </p> <p align="justify"> The hearing before a bench led by Justice R M Lodha and comprising Justices Madan Lokur and Kurien Joseph, will essentially look into whether the &quot;vetting&quot; of the status report by the law minister amounted to interfering with CBI's probe and, therefore, an act of impropriety. UPA sources agreed that an adverse determination against the law minister may lead the Congress leadership with little option than to secure Ashwani's papers. </p> <p align="justify"> Contrary to reports in media, the CBI has not submitted to the court that the changes were carried out at the law minister's instance. </p> <p align="justify"> Sources said CBI counsel U U Lalit will present to the court the draft of the status report that the CBI took to the law ministry on March 6, so that Justice Lodha and his brother justices can compare it to the version that was submitted to them on March 8. &quot;We may have to let go of the law minister if the two drafts look significantly different and the contrast leads the court to conclude that Ashwani's intervention was not minor and went beyond proof reading,&quot; said a senior UPA functionary. </p> <p align="justify"> As against this, the PMO and coal ministry, which appeared to have taken a peep into the contents of the status report but stopped short of suggesting amendments, are in safer zone. </p> <p align="justify"> Although governments have rarely been comfortable with judiciary taking charge of a politically significant investigation, UPA leadership on Monday seemed resigned to having to swallow the not-so-sweet pill in order to get out of the tricky situation it was pushed into on Friday when the CBI confirmed to the court that it was made to share the contents of the report with the law minister, as well as the PMO and the coal ministry. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;We can live with an SIT looking into the case and reporting to the SC,&quot; said a senior UPA source on Monday when the opposition kept up the pressure for the law minister's resignation for interfering with the CBI probe, virtually eliminating the prospect of the rest of the budget session accomplishing anything significant besides the passage of the bill. </p> <p align="justify"> On March 12, the court had asked the AG whether he had seen the report and whether he had a copy of it. Vahanvati had said that he did not have a copy of the status report. After that, the court asked Raval whether all the status reports were vetted by the CBI director. After Raval replied in the affirmative, the bench asked, &quot;Are you sharing the information given in the status report with the political executive?&quot; </p> <p align="justify"> Raval said, &quot;No. It is a classified document meant only for the court.&quot; At this, the court had asked the CBI director to file an affidavit to the effect that the status report was vetted by him and was not shared with the political executive. But the director in his two-page affidavit said it was not only shared with law minister but also with PMO and coal ministry officials. </p> <p align="justify"> When the matter is taken up for hearing on Tuesday in the backdrop of the controversy, the bench could consider options of taking over monitoring of the probe into the coal block allocation scam or even appoint a special investigation team to either supervise the CBI's probe. </p> <p align="justify"> The CBI too intends to file documents to show what portions of its probe status report were changed by the &quot;political executive&quot; before its filing in the Supreme Court on March 8. All together the developments in the last two weeks promise an exciting hearing in the SC on Tuesday. </p>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Times of India, 30 April, 2013, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Vetting-of-coal-report-Top-govt-law-officers-indulge-in-blame-game-ahead-of-SC-hearing/articleshow/19792152.cms', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'vetting-of-coal-report-top-govt-law-officers-indulge-in-blame-game-ahead-of-sc-hearing-dhananjay-mahapatra-20796', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 20796, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], '[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[repository]' => 'Articles' }, 'articleid' => (int) 20652, 'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Vetting of coal report: Top govt law officers indulge in blame game ahead of SC hearing -Dhananjay Mahapatra', 'metaKeywords' => 'coal mines,Mining,Corruption,Governance,transparency', 'metaDesc' => ' -The Times of India Less than 24 hours before the Supreme Court takes up the coal scam hearing on Tuesday, a blame game broke out within the government over who was responsible for incorrectly telling the court that the CBI had...', 'disp' => '<div align="justify">-The Times of India</div><p align="justify"><br />Less than 24 hours before the Supreme Court takes up the coal scam hearing on Tuesday, a blame game broke out within the government over who was responsible for incorrectly telling the court that the CBI had not shared the contents of its status report on &quot; Coalgate&quot; with the political executive.</p><p align="justify">In a four-page letter to attorney general Goolam Vahanvati, additional solicitor general Harin Raval said he had been made a &quot;scapegoat&quot; for informing the court that the March 8 CBI status report had not been shared with the political executive even though it was the attorney general who gave that statement to the court first.</p><p align="justify">Raval said after the highest law officer had given a statement to the court on March 12 that the probe status report was not shown to the government, he had no option but to &quot;embarrassingly&quot; stick to the same argument.</p><p align="justify">He told Vahanvati that the latter too was present in the meeting at the law minister's office where the alleged vetting of the coal scam investigation status report took place prior to its filing in the Supreme Court. The ASG alleged that despite having full knowledge of the probe status report, the AG decided to tell the court on March 12 that he had no knowledge of it.</p><p align="justify">The letter, with a copy marked to beleaguered law minister Ashwani Kumar, stunned the AG. When contacted by TOI for his response, Vahanvati said, &quot;I am extremely upset to receive it a day before the hearing in the Supreme Court. It is very unfortunate. I never informed the court that it was not shared with the political executive. When the court asked whether I had a copy of the report, I said no. I still do not have a copy of it and we responded to the CBI's allegation on the basis of the court informing that the agency prima facie found that there was no basis or rationale behind the coal block allocations.&quot;</p><p align="justify">The public display of differences came on a day when government, feeling the pressure of opposition's protest against interference with CBI's investigation, swiftly moved to bring forward the date for the passage of the budget in Lok Sabha to Tuesday to guard against the possibility of a major mishap. The budget was set to be passed over two days beginning May 6. Sources attributed the sudden switch of dates to &quot;caution&quot; on the part of parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath to ensure that the finance bill was not stuck in case Parliament had to be adjourned abruptly.</p><p align="justify">The public feuding between the law officers erupted when the government was bracing for the crucial SC hearing on Tuesday on whether law minister Ashwani Kumar, the PMO and the coal ministry sought to subvert CBI's investigation into 'Coalgate'.</p><p align="justify">The hearing before a bench led by Justice R M Lodha and comprising Justices Madan Lokur and Kurien Joseph, will essentially look into whether the &quot;vetting&quot; of the status report by the law minister amounted to interfering with CBI's probe and, therefore, an act of impropriety. UPA sources agreed that an adverse determination against the law minister may lead the Congress leadership with little option than to secure Ashwani's papers.</p><p align="justify">Contrary to reports in media, the CBI has not submitted to the court that the changes were carried out at the law minister's instance.</p><p align="justify">Sources said CBI counsel U U Lalit will present to the court the draft of the status report that the CBI took to the law ministry on March 6, so that Justice Lodha and his brother justices can compare it to the version that was submitted to them on March 8. &quot;We may have to let go of the law minister if the two drafts look significantly different and the contrast leads the court to conclude that Ashwani's intervention was not minor and went beyond proof reading,&quot; said a senior UPA functionary.</p><p align="justify">As against this, the PMO and coal ministry, which appeared to have taken a peep into the contents of the status report but stopped short of suggesting amendments, are in safer zone.</p><p align="justify">Although governments have rarely been comfortable with judiciary taking charge of a politically significant investigation, UPA leadership on Monday seemed resigned to having to swallow the not-so-sweet pill in order to get out of the tricky situation it was pushed into on Friday when the CBI confirmed to the court that it was made to share the contents of the report with the law minister, as well as the PMO and the coal ministry.</p><p align="justify">&quot;We can live with an SIT looking into the case and reporting to the SC,&quot; said a senior UPA source on Monday when the opposition kept up the pressure for the law minister's resignation for interfering with the CBI probe, virtually eliminating the prospect of the rest of the budget session accomplishing anything significant besides the passage of the bill.</p><p align="justify">On March 12, the court had asked the AG whether he had seen the report and whether he had a copy of it. Vahanvati had said that he did not have a copy of the status report. After that, the court asked Raval whether all the status reports were vetted by the CBI director. After Raval replied in the affirmative, the bench asked, &quot;Are you sharing the information given in the status report with the political executive?&quot;</p><p align="justify">Raval said, &quot;No. It is a classified document meant only for the court.&quot; At this, the court had asked the CBI director to file an affidavit to the effect that the status report was vetted by him and was not shared with the political executive. But the director in his two-page affidavit said it was not only shared with law minister but also with PMO and coal ministry officials.</p><p align="justify">When the matter is taken up for hearing on Tuesday in the backdrop of the controversy, the bench could consider options of taking over monitoring of the probe into the coal block allocation scam or even appoint a special investigation team to either supervise the CBI's probe.</p><p align="justify">The CBI too intends to file documents to show what portions of its probe status report were changed by the &quot;political executive&quot; before its filing in the Supreme Court on March 8. All together the developments in the last two weeks promise an exciting hearing in the SC on Tuesday.</p>', 'lang' => 'English', 'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/', 'site_title' => 'im4change', 'adminprix' => 'admin' ] $article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 20652, 'title' => 'Vetting of coal report: Top govt law officers indulge in blame game ahead of SC hearing -Dhananjay Mahapatra', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div align="justify"> -The Times of India </div> <p align="justify"> <br /> Less than 24 hours before the Supreme Court takes up the coal scam hearing on Tuesday, a blame game broke out within the government over who was responsible for incorrectly telling the court that the CBI had not shared the contents of its status report on &quot; Coalgate&quot; with the political executive. </p> <p align="justify"> In a four-page letter to attorney general Goolam Vahanvati, additional solicitor general Harin Raval said he had been made a &quot;scapegoat&quot; for informing the court that the March 8 CBI status report had not been shared with the political executive even though it was the attorney general who gave that statement to the court first. </p> <p align="justify"> Raval said after the highest law officer had given a statement to the court on March 12 that the probe status report was not shown to the government, he had no option but to &quot;embarrassingly&quot; stick to the same argument. </p> <p align="justify"> He told Vahanvati that the latter too was present in the meeting at the law minister's office where the alleged vetting of the coal scam investigation status report took place prior to its filing in the Supreme Court. The ASG alleged that despite having full knowledge of the probe status report, the AG decided to tell the court on March 12 that he had no knowledge of it. </p> <p align="justify"> The letter, with a copy marked to beleaguered law minister Ashwani Kumar, stunned the AG. When contacted by TOI for his response, Vahanvati said, &quot;I am extremely upset to receive it a day before the hearing in the Supreme Court. It is very unfortunate. I never informed the court that it was not shared with the political executive. When the court asked whether I had a copy of the report, I said no. I still do not have a copy of it and we responded to the CBI's allegation on the basis of the court informing that the agency prima facie found that there was no basis or rationale behind the coal block allocations.&quot; </p> <p align="justify"> The public display of differences came on a day when government, feeling the pressure of opposition's protest against interference with CBI's investigation, swiftly moved to bring forward the date for the passage of the budget in Lok Sabha to Tuesday to guard against the possibility of a major mishap. The budget was set to be passed over two days beginning May 6. Sources attributed the sudden switch of dates to &quot;caution&quot; on the part of parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath to ensure that the finance bill was not stuck in case Parliament had to be adjourned abruptly. </p> <p align="justify"> The public feuding between the law officers erupted when the government was bracing for the crucial SC hearing on Tuesday on whether law minister Ashwani Kumar, the PMO and the coal ministry sought to subvert CBI's investigation into 'Coalgate'. </p> <p align="justify"> The hearing before a bench led by Justice R M Lodha and comprising Justices Madan Lokur and Kurien Joseph, will essentially look into whether the &quot;vetting&quot; of the status report by the law minister amounted to interfering with CBI's probe and, therefore, an act of impropriety. UPA sources agreed that an adverse determination against the law minister may lead the Congress leadership with little option than to secure Ashwani's papers. </p> <p align="justify"> Contrary to reports in media, the CBI has not submitted to the court that the changes were carried out at the law minister's instance. </p> <p align="justify"> Sources said CBI counsel U U Lalit will present to the court the draft of the status report that the CBI took to the law ministry on March 6, so that Justice Lodha and his brother justices can compare it to the version that was submitted to them on March 8. &quot;We may have to let go of the law minister if the two drafts look significantly different and the contrast leads the court to conclude that Ashwani's intervention was not minor and went beyond proof reading,&quot; said a senior UPA functionary. </p> <p align="justify"> As against this, the PMO and coal ministry, which appeared to have taken a peep into the contents of the status report but stopped short of suggesting amendments, are in safer zone. </p> <p align="justify"> Although governments have rarely been comfortable with judiciary taking charge of a politically significant investigation, UPA leadership on Monday seemed resigned to having to swallow the not-so-sweet pill in order to get out of the tricky situation it was pushed into on Friday when the CBI confirmed to the court that it was made to share the contents of the report with the law minister, as well as the PMO and the coal ministry. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;We can live with an SIT looking into the case and reporting to the SC,&quot; said a senior UPA source on Monday when the opposition kept up the pressure for the law minister's resignation for interfering with the CBI probe, virtually eliminating the prospect of the rest of the budget session accomplishing anything significant besides the passage of the bill. </p> <p align="justify"> On March 12, the court had asked the AG whether he had seen the report and whether he had a copy of it. Vahanvati had said that he did not have a copy of the status report. After that, the court asked Raval whether all the status reports were vetted by the CBI director. After Raval replied in the affirmative, the bench asked, &quot;Are you sharing the information given in the status report with the political executive?&quot; </p> <p align="justify"> Raval said, &quot;No. It is a classified document meant only for the court.&quot; At this, the court had asked the CBI director to file an affidavit to the effect that the status report was vetted by him and was not shared with the political executive. But the director in his two-page affidavit said it was not only shared with law minister but also with PMO and coal ministry officials. </p> <p align="justify"> When the matter is taken up for hearing on Tuesday in the backdrop of the controversy, the bench could consider options of taking over monitoring of the probe into the coal block allocation scam or even appoint a special investigation team to either supervise the CBI's probe. </p> <p align="justify"> The CBI too intends to file documents to show what portions of its probe status report were changed by the &quot;political executive&quot; before its filing in the Supreme Court on March 8. All together the developments in the last two weeks promise an exciting hearing in the SC on Tuesday. </p>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Times of India, 30 April, 2013, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Vetting-of-coal-report-Top-govt-law-officers-indulge-in-blame-game-ahead-of-SC-hearing/articleshow/19792152.cms', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'vetting-of-coal-report-top-govt-law-officers-indulge-in-blame-game-ahead-of-sc-hearing-dhananjay-mahapatra-20796', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 20796, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 3 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 4 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {} ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ '*' => true, 'id' => false ], '[dirty]' => [], '[original]' => [], '[virtual]' => [], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [], '[invalid]' => [], '[repository]' => 'Articles' } $articleid = (int) 20652 $metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Vetting of coal report: Top govt law officers indulge in blame game ahead of SC hearing -Dhananjay Mahapatra' $metaKeywords = 'coal mines,Mining,Corruption,Governance,transparency' $metaDesc = ' -The Times of India Less than 24 hours before the Supreme Court takes up the coal scam hearing on Tuesday, a blame game broke out within the government over who was responsible for incorrectly telling the court that the CBI had...' $disp = '<div align="justify">-The Times of India</div><p align="justify"><br />Less than 24 hours before the Supreme Court takes up the coal scam hearing on Tuesday, a blame game broke out within the government over who was responsible for incorrectly telling the court that the CBI had not shared the contents of its status report on &quot; Coalgate&quot; with the political executive.</p><p align="justify">In a four-page letter to attorney general Goolam Vahanvati, additional solicitor general Harin Raval said he had been made a &quot;scapegoat&quot; for informing the court that the March 8 CBI status report had not been shared with the political executive even though it was the attorney general who gave that statement to the court first.</p><p align="justify">Raval said after the highest law officer had given a statement to the court on March 12 that the probe status report was not shown to the government, he had no option but to &quot;embarrassingly&quot; stick to the same argument.</p><p align="justify">He told Vahanvati that the latter too was present in the meeting at the law minister's office where the alleged vetting of the coal scam investigation status report took place prior to its filing in the Supreme Court. The ASG alleged that despite having full knowledge of the probe status report, the AG decided to tell the court on March 12 that he had no knowledge of it.</p><p align="justify">The letter, with a copy marked to beleaguered law minister Ashwani Kumar, stunned the AG. When contacted by TOI for his response, Vahanvati said, &quot;I am extremely upset to receive it a day before the hearing in the Supreme Court. It is very unfortunate. I never informed the court that it was not shared with the political executive. When the court asked whether I had a copy of the report, I said no. I still do not have a copy of it and we responded to the CBI's allegation on the basis of the court informing that the agency prima facie found that there was no basis or rationale behind the coal block allocations.&quot;</p><p align="justify">The public display of differences came on a day when government, feeling the pressure of opposition's protest against interference with CBI's investigation, swiftly moved to bring forward the date for the passage of the budget in Lok Sabha to Tuesday to guard against the possibility of a major mishap. The budget was set to be passed over two days beginning May 6. Sources attributed the sudden switch of dates to &quot;caution&quot; on the part of parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath to ensure that the finance bill was not stuck in case Parliament had to be adjourned abruptly.</p><p align="justify">The public feuding between the law officers erupted when the government was bracing for the crucial SC hearing on Tuesday on whether law minister Ashwani Kumar, the PMO and the coal ministry sought to subvert CBI's investigation into 'Coalgate'.</p><p align="justify">The hearing before a bench led by Justice R M Lodha and comprising Justices Madan Lokur and Kurien Joseph, will essentially look into whether the &quot;vetting&quot; of the status report by the law minister amounted to interfering with CBI's probe and, therefore, an act of impropriety. UPA sources agreed that an adverse determination against the law minister may lead the Congress leadership with little option than to secure Ashwani's papers.</p><p align="justify">Contrary to reports in media, the CBI has not submitted to the court that the changes were carried out at the law minister's instance.</p><p align="justify">Sources said CBI counsel U U Lalit will present to the court the draft of the status report that the CBI took to the law ministry on March 6, so that Justice Lodha and his brother justices can compare it to the version that was submitted to them on March 8. &quot;We may have to let go of the law minister if the two drafts look significantly different and the contrast leads the court to conclude that Ashwani's intervention was not minor and went beyond proof reading,&quot; said a senior UPA functionary.</p><p align="justify">As against this, the PMO and coal ministry, which appeared to have taken a peep into the contents of the status report but stopped short of suggesting amendments, are in safer zone.</p><p align="justify">Although governments have rarely been comfortable with judiciary taking charge of a politically significant investigation, UPA leadership on Monday seemed resigned to having to swallow the not-so-sweet pill in order to get out of the tricky situation it was pushed into on Friday when the CBI confirmed to the court that it was made to share the contents of the report with the law minister, as well as the PMO and the coal ministry.</p><p align="justify">&quot;We can live with an SIT looking into the case and reporting to the SC,&quot; said a senior UPA source on Monday when the opposition kept up the pressure for the law minister's resignation for interfering with the CBI probe, virtually eliminating the prospect of the rest of the budget session accomplishing anything significant besides the passage of the bill.</p><p align="justify">On March 12, the court had asked the AG whether he had seen the report and whether he had a copy of it. Vahanvati had said that he did not have a copy of the status report. After that, the court asked Raval whether all the status reports were vetted by the CBI director. After Raval replied in the affirmative, the bench asked, &quot;Are you sharing the information given in the status report with the political executive?&quot;</p><p align="justify">Raval said, &quot;No. It is a classified document meant only for the court.&quot; At this, the court had asked the CBI director to file an affidavit to the effect that the status report was vetted by him and was not shared with the political executive. But the director in his two-page affidavit said it was not only shared with law minister but also with PMO and coal ministry officials.</p><p align="justify">When the matter is taken up for hearing on Tuesday in the backdrop of the controversy, the bench could consider options of taking over monitoring of the probe into the coal block allocation scam or even appoint a special investigation team to either supervise the CBI's probe.</p><p align="justify">The CBI too intends to file documents to show what portions of its probe status report were changed by the &quot;political executive&quot; before its filing in the Supreme Court on March 8. All together the developments in the last two weeks promise an exciting hearing in the SC on Tuesday.</p>' $lang = 'English' $SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/' $site_title = 'im4change' $adminprix = 'admin'</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8 Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413 Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374 Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927 Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885 Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/vetting-of-coal-report-top-govt-law-officers-indulge-in-blame-game-ahead-of-sc-hearing-dhananjay-mahapatra-20796.html"/> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/> <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="all"/> <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Vetting of coal report: Top govt law officers indulge in blame game ahead of SC hearing -Dhananjay Mahapatra | Im4change.org</title> <meta name="description" content=" -The Times of India Less than 24 hours before the Supreme Court takes up the coal scam hearing on Tuesday, a blame game broke out within the government over who was responsible for incorrectly telling the court that the CBI had..."/> <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script> <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript"> $(document).ready(function () { var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem var pic_real_width, pic_real_height; $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues .attr("src", $(img).attr("src")) .load(function () { pic_real_width = this.width; // Note: $(this).width() will not pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images. }); }); </script> <style type="text/css"> @media screen { div.divFooter { display: block; } } @media print { .printbutton { display: none !important; } } </style> </head> <body> <table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center"> <tr> <td class="top_bg"> <div class="divFooter"> <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0" alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/> </div> </td> </tr> <tr> <td id="topspace"> </td> </tr> <tr id="topspace"> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%"> <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal"> <strong>Vetting of coal report: Top govt law officers indulge in blame game ahead of SC hearing -Dhananjay Mahapatra</strong></h1> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3"> <div align="justify">-The Times of India</div><p align="justify"><br />Less than 24 hours before the Supreme Court takes up the coal scam hearing on Tuesday, a blame game broke out within the government over who was responsible for incorrectly telling the court that the CBI had not shared the contents of its status report on " Coalgate" with the political executive.</p><p align="justify">In a four-page letter to attorney general Goolam Vahanvati, additional solicitor general Harin Raval said he had been made a "scapegoat" for informing the court that the March 8 CBI status report had not been shared with the political executive even though it was the attorney general who gave that statement to the court first.</p><p align="justify">Raval said after the highest law officer had given a statement to the court on March 12 that the probe status report was not shown to the government, he had no option but to "embarrassingly" stick to the same argument.</p><p align="justify">He told Vahanvati that the latter too was present in the meeting at the law minister's office where the alleged vetting of the coal scam investigation status report took place prior to its filing in the Supreme Court. The ASG alleged that despite having full knowledge of the probe status report, the AG decided to tell the court on March 12 that he had no knowledge of it.</p><p align="justify">The letter, with a copy marked to beleaguered law minister Ashwani Kumar, stunned the AG. When contacted by TOI for his response, Vahanvati said, "I am extremely upset to receive it a day before the hearing in the Supreme Court. It is very unfortunate. I never informed the court that it was not shared with the political executive. When the court asked whether I had a copy of the report, I said no. I still do not have a copy of it and we responded to the CBI's allegation on the basis of the court informing that the agency prima facie found that there was no basis or rationale behind the coal block allocations."</p><p align="justify">The public display of differences came on a day when government, feeling the pressure of opposition's protest against interference with CBI's investigation, swiftly moved to bring forward the date for the passage of the budget in Lok Sabha to Tuesday to guard against the possibility of a major mishap. The budget was set to be passed over two days beginning May 6. Sources attributed the sudden switch of dates to "caution" on the part of parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath to ensure that the finance bill was not stuck in case Parliament had to be adjourned abruptly.</p><p align="justify">The public feuding between the law officers erupted when the government was bracing for the crucial SC hearing on Tuesday on whether law minister Ashwani Kumar, the PMO and the coal ministry sought to subvert CBI's investigation into 'Coalgate'.</p><p align="justify">The hearing before a bench led by Justice R M Lodha and comprising Justices Madan Lokur and Kurien Joseph, will essentially look into whether the "vetting" of the status report by the law minister amounted to interfering with CBI's probe and, therefore, an act of impropriety. UPA sources agreed that an adverse determination against the law minister may lead the Congress leadership with little option than to secure Ashwani's papers.</p><p align="justify">Contrary to reports in media, the CBI has not submitted to the court that the changes were carried out at the law minister's instance.</p><p align="justify">Sources said CBI counsel U U Lalit will present to the court the draft of the status report that the CBI took to the law ministry on March 6, so that Justice Lodha and his brother justices can compare it to the version that was submitted to them on March 8. "We may have to let go of the law minister if the two drafts look significantly different and the contrast leads the court to conclude that Ashwani's intervention was not minor and went beyond proof reading," said a senior UPA functionary.</p><p align="justify">As against this, the PMO and coal ministry, which appeared to have taken a peep into the contents of the status report but stopped short of suggesting amendments, are in safer zone.</p><p align="justify">Although governments have rarely been comfortable with judiciary taking charge of a politically significant investigation, UPA leadership on Monday seemed resigned to having to swallow the not-so-sweet pill in order to get out of the tricky situation it was pushed into on Friday when the CBI confirmed to the court that it was made to share the contents of the report with the law minister, as well as the PMO and the coal ministry.</p><p align="justify">"We can live with an SIT looking into the case and reporting to the SC," said a senior UPA source on Monday when the opposition kept up the pressure for the law minister's resignation for interfering with the CBI probe, virtually eliminating the prospect of the rest of the budget session accomplishing anything significant besides the passage of the bill.</p><p align="justify">On March 12, the court had asked the AG whether he had seen the report and whether he had a copy of it. Vahanvati had said that he did not have a copy of the status report. After that, the court asked Raval whether all the status reports were vetted by the CBI director. After Raval replied in the affirmative, the bench asked, "Are you sharing the information given in the status report with the political executive?"</p><p align="justify">Raval said, "No. It is a classified document meant only for the court." At this, the court had asked the CBI director to file an affidavit to the effect that the status report was vetted by him and was not shared with the political executive. But the director in his two-page affidavit said it was not only shared with law minister but also with PMO and coal ministry officials.</p><p align="justify">When the matter is taken up for hearing on Tuesday in the backdrop of the controversy, the bench could consider options of taking over monitoring of the probe into the coal block allocation scam or even appoint a special investigation team to either supervise the CBI's probe.</p><p align="justify">The CBI too intends to file documents to show what portions of its probe status report were changed by the "political executive" before its filing in the Supreme Court on March 8. All together the developments in the last two weeks promise an exciting hearing in the SC on Tuesday.</p> </font> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> </table></body> </html>' } $maxBufferLength = (int) 8192 $file = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php' $line = (int) 853 $message = 'Unable to emit headers. Headers sent in file=/home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php line=853'Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 48 Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141 [main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148]Code Context$response->getStatusCode(),
($reasonPhrase ? ' ' . $reasonPhrase : '')
));
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) { 'status' => (int) 200, 'contentType' => 'text/html', 'headers' => [ 'Content-Type' => [ [maximum depth reached] ] ], 'file' => null, 'fileRange' => [], 'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {}, 'cacheDirectives' => [], 'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr68144e090d0de-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr68144e090d0de-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr68144e090d0de-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr68144e090d0de-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr68144e090d0de-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr68144e090d0de-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr68144e090d0de-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr68144e090d0de-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">> </span></span></code> <span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000"> <link rel="canonical" href="<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">); </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>/<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>.html"/> </span></code></span> <code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"> </span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type" </span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html; charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/> </span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr68144e090d0de-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp' $dataForView = [ 'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 20652, 'title' => 'Vetting of coal report: Top govt law officers indulge in blame game ahead of SC hearing -Dhananjay Mahapatra', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div align="justify"> -The Times of India </div> <p align="justify"> <br /> Less than 24 hours before the Supreme Court takes up the coal scam hearing on Tuesday, a blame game broke out within the government over who was responsible for incorrectly telling the court that the CBI had not shared the contents of its status report on &quot; Coalgate&quot; with the political executive. </p> <p align="justify"> In a four-page letter to attorney general Goolam Vahanvati, additional solicitor general Harin Raval said he had been made a &quot;scapegoat&quot; for informing the court that the March 8 CBI status report had not been shared with the political executive even though it was the attorney general who gave that statement to the court first. </p> <p align="justify"> Raval said after the highest law officer had given a statement to the court on March 12 that the probe status report was not shown to the government, he had no option but to &quot;embarrassingly&quot; stick to the same argument. </p> <p align="justify"> He told Vahanvati that the latter too was present in the meeting at the law minister's office where the alleged vetting of the coal scam investigation status report took place prior to its filing in the Supreme Court. The ASG alleged that despite having full knowledge of the probe status report, the AG decided to tell the court on March 12 that he had no knowledge of it. </p> <p align="justify"> The letter, with a copy marked to beleaguered law minister Ashwani Kumar, stunned the AG. When contacted by TOI for his response, Vahanvati said, &quot;I am extremely upset to receive it a day before the hearing in the Supreme Court. It is very unfortunate. I never informed the court that it was not shared with the political executive. When the court asked whether I had a copy of the report, I said no. I still do not have a copy of it and we responded to the CBI's allegation on the basis of the court informing that the agency prima facie found that there was no basis or rationale behind the coal block allocations.&quot; </p> <p align="justify"> The public display of differences came on a day when government, feeling the pressure of opposition's protest against interference with CBI's investigation, swiftly moved to bring forward the date for the passage of the budget in Lok Sabha to Tuesday to guard against the possibility of a major mishap. The budget was set to be passed over two days beginning May 6. Sources attributed the sudden switch of dates to &quot;caution&quot; on the part of parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath to ensure that the finance bill was not stuck in case Parliament had to be adjourned abruptly. </p> <p align="justify"> The public feuding between the law officers erupted when the government was bracing for the crucial SC hearing on Tuesday on whether law minister Ashwani Kumar, the PMO and the coal ministry sought to subvert CBI's investigation into 'Coalgate'. </p> <p align="justify"> The hearing before a bench led by Justice R M Lodha and comprising Justices Madan Lokur and Kurien Joseph, will essentially look into whether the &quot;vetting&quot; of the status report by the law minister amounted to interfering with CBI's probe and, therefore, an act of impropriety. UPA sources agreed that an adverse determination against the law minister may lead the Congress leadership with little option than to secure Ashwani's papers. </p> <p align="justify"> Contrary to reports in media, the CBI has not submitted to the court that the changes were carried out at the law minister's instance. </p> <p align="justify"> Sources said CBI counsel U U Lalit will present to the court the draft of the status report that the CBI took to the law ministry on March 6, so that Justice Lodha and his brother justices can compare it to the version that was submitted to them on March 8. &quot;We may have to let go of the law minister if the two drafts look significantly different and the contrast leads the court to conclude that Ashwani's intervention was not minor and went beyond proof reading,&quot; said a senior UPA functionary. </p> <p align="justify"> As against this, the PMO and coal ministry, which appeared to have taken a peep into the contents of the status report but stopped short of suggesting amendments, are in safer zone. </p> <p align="justify"> Although governments have rarely been comfortable with judiciary taking charge of a politically significant investigation, UPA leadership on Monday seemed resigned to having to swallow the not-so-sweet pill in order to get out of the tricky situation it was pushed into on Friday when the CBI confirmed to the court that it was made to share the contents of the report with the law minister, as well as the PMO and the coal ministry. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;We can live with an SIT looking into the case and reporting to the SC,&quot; said a senior UPA source on Monday when the opposition kept up the pressure for the law minister's resignation for interfering with the CBI probe, virtually eliminating the prospect of the rest of the budget session accomplishing anything significant besides the passage of the bill. </p> <p align="justify"> On March 12, the court had asked the AG whether he had seen the report and whether he had a copy of it. Vahanvati had said that he did not have a copy of the status report. After that, the court asked Raval whether all the status reports were vetted by the CBI director. After Raval replied in the affirmative, the bench asked, &quot;Are you sharing the information given in the status report with the political executive?&quot; </p> <p align="justify"> Raval said, &quot;No. It is a classified document meant only for the court.&quot; At this, the court had asked the CBI director to file an affidavit to the effect that the status report was vetted by him and was not shared with the political executive. But the director in his two-page affidavit said it was not only shared with law minister but also with PMO and coal ministry officials. </p> <p align="justify"> When the matter is taken up for hearing on Tuesday in the backdrop of the controversy, the bench could consider options of taking over monitoring of the probe into the coal block allocation scam or even appoint a special investigation team to either supervise the CBI's probe. </p> <p align="justify"> The CBI too intends to file documents to show what portions of its probe status report were changed by the &quot;political executive&quot; before its filing in the Supreme Court on March 8. All together the developments in the last two weeks promise an exciting hearing in the SC on Tuesday. </p>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Times of India, 30 April, 2013, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Vetting-of-coal-report-Top-govt-law-officers-indulge-in-blame-game-ahead-of-SC-hearing/articleshow/19792152.cms', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'vetting-of-coal-report-top-govt-law-officers-indulge-in-blame-game-ahead-of-sc-hearing-dhananjay-mahapatra-20796', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 20796, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], '[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[repository]' => 'Articles' }, 'articleid' => (int) 20652, 'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Vetting of coal report: Top govt law officers indulge in blame game ahead of SC hearing -Dhananjay Mahapatra', 'metaKeywords' => 'coal mines,Mining,Corruption,Governance,transparency', 'metaDesc' => ' -The Times of India Less than 24 hours before the Supreme Court takes up the coal scam hearing on Tuesday, a blame game broke out within the government over who was responsible for incorrectly telling the court that the CBI had...', 'disp' => '<div align="justify">-The Times of India</div><p align="justify"><br />Less than 24 hours before the Supreme Court takes up the coal scam hearing on Tuesday, a blame game broke out within the government over who was responsible for incorrectly telling the court that the CBI had not shared the contents of its status report on &quot; Coalgate&quot; with the political executive.</p><p align="justify">In a four-page letter to attorney general Goolam Vahanvati, additional solicitor general Harin Raval said he had been made a &quot;scapegoat&quot; for informing the court that the March 8 CBI status report had not been shared with the political executive even though it was the attorney general who gave that statement to the court first.</p><p align="justify">Raval said after the highest law officer had given a statement to the court on March 12 that the probe status report was not shown to the government, he had no option but to &quot;embarrassingly&quot; stick to the same argument.</p><p align="justify">He told Vahanvati that the latter too was present in the meeting at the law minister's office where the alleged vetting of the coal scam investigation status report took place prior to its filing in the Supreme Court. The ASG alleged that despite having full knowledge of the probe status report, the AG decided to tell the court on March 12 that he had no knowledge of it.</p><p align="justify">The letter, with a copy marked to beleaguered law minister Ashwani Kumar, stunned the AG. When contacted by TOI for his response, Vahanvati said, &quot;I am extremely upset to receive it a day before the hearing in the Supreme Court. It is very unfortunate. I never informed the court that it was not shared with the political executive. When the court asked whether I had a copy of the report, I said no. I still do not have a copy of it and we responded to the CBI's allegation on the basis of the court informing that the agency prima facie found that there was no basis or rationale behind the coal block allocations.&quot;</p><p align="justify">The public display of differences came on a day when government, feeling the pressure of opposition's protest against interference with CBI's investigation, swiftly moved to bring forward the date for the passage of the budget in Lok Sabha to Tuesday to guard against the possibility of a major mishap. The budget was set to be passed over two days beginning May 6. Sources attributed the sudden switch of dates to &quot;caution&quot; on the part of parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath to ensure that the finance bill was not stuck in case Parliament had to be adjourned abruptly.</p><p align="justify">The public feuding between the law officers erupted when the government was bracing for the crucial SC hearing on Tuesday on whether law minister Ashwani Kumar, the PMO and the coal ministry sought to subvert CBI's investigation into 'Coalgate'.</p><p align="justify">The hearing before a bench led by Justice R M Lodha and comprising Justices Madan Lokur and Kurien Joseph, will essentially look into whether the &quot;vetting&quot; of the status report by the law minister amounted to interfering with CBI's probe and, therefore, an act of impropriety. UPA sources agreed that an adverse determination against the law minister may lead the Congress leadership with little option than to secure Ashwani's papers.</p><p align="justify">Contrary to reports in media, the CBI has not submitted to the court that the changes were carried out at the law minister's instance.</p><p align="justify">Sources said CBI counsel U U Lalit will present to the court the draft of the status report that the CBI took to the law ministry on March 6, so that Justice Lodha and his brother justices can compare it to the version that was submitted to them on March 8. &quot;We may have to let go of the law minister if the two drafts look significantly different and the contrast leads the court to conclude that Ashwani's intervention was not minor and went beyond proof reading,&quot; said a senior UPA functionary.</p><p align="justify">As against this, the PMO and coal ministry, which appeared to have taken a peep into the contents of the status report but stopped short of suggesting amendments, are in safer zone.</p><p align="justify">Although governments have rarely been comfortable with judiciary taking charge of a politically significant investigation, UPA leadership on Monday seemed resigned to having to swallow the not-so-sweet pill in order to get out of the tricky situation it was pushed into on Friday when the CBI confirmed to the court that it was made to share the contents of the report with the law minister, as well as the PMO and the coal ministry.</p><p align="justify">&quot;We can live with an SIT looking into the case and reporting to the SC,&quot; said a senior UPA source on Monday when the opposition kept up the pressure for the law minister's resignation for interfering with the CBI probe, virtually eliminating the prospect of the rest of the budget session accomplishing anything significant besides the passage of the bill.</p><p align="justify">On March 12, the court had asked the AG whether he had seen the report and whether he had a copy of it. Vahanvati had said that he did not have a copy of the status report. After that, the court asked Raval whether all the status reports were vetted by the CBI director. After Raval replied in the affirmative, the bench asked, &quot;Are you sharing the information given in the status report with the political executive?&quot;</p><p align="justify">Raval said, &quot;No. It is a classified document meant only for the court.&quot; At this, the court had asked the CBI director to file an affidavit to the effect that the status report was vetted by him and was not shared with the political executive. But the director in his two-page affidavit said it was not only shared with law minister but also with PMO and coal ministry officials.</p><p align="justify">When the matter is taken up for hearing on Tuesday in the backdrop of the controversy, the bench could consider options of taking over monitoring of the probe into the coal block allocation scam or even appoint a special investigation team to either supervise the CBI's probe.</p><p align="justify">The CBI too intends to file documents to show what portions of its probe status report were changed by the &quot;political executive&quot; before its filing in the Supreme Court on March 8. All together the developments in the last two weeks promise an exciting hearing in the SC on Tuesday.</p>', 'lang' => 'English', 'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/', 'site_title' => 'im4change', 'adminprix' => 'admin' ] $article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 20652, 'title' => 'Vetting of coal report: Top govt law officers indulge in blame game ahead of SC hearing -Dhananjay Mahapatra', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div align="justify"> -The Times of India </div> <p align="justify"> <br /> Less than 24 hours before the Supreme Court takes up the coal scam hearing on Tuesday, a blame game broke out within the government over who was responsible for incorrectly telling the court that the CBI had not shared the contents of its status report on &quot; Coalgate&quot; with the political executive. </p> <p align="justify"> In a four-page letter to attorney general Goolam Vahanvati, additional solicitor general Harin Raval said he had been made a &quot;scapegoat&quot; for informing the court that the March 8 CBI status report had not been shared with the political executive even though it was the attorney general who gave that statement to the court first. </p> <p align="justify"> Raval said after the highest law officer had given a statement to the court on March 12 that the probe status report was not shown to the government, he had no option but to &quot;embarrassingly&quot; stick to the same argument. </p> <p align="justify"> He told Vahanvati that the latter too was present in the meeting at the law minister's office where the alleged vetting of the coal scam investigation status report took place prior to its filing in the Supreme Court. The ASG alleged that despite having full knowledge of the probe status report, the AG decided to tell the court on March 12 that he had no knowledge of it. </p> <p align="justify"> The letter, with a copy marked to beleaguered law minister Ashwani Kumar, stunned the AG. When contacted by TOI for his response, Vahanvati said, &quot;I am extremely upset to receive it a day before the hearing in the Supreme Court. It is very unfortunate. I never informed the court that it was not shared with the political executive. When the court asked whether I had a copy of the report, I said no. I still do not have a copy of it and we responded to the CBI's allegation on the basis of the court informing that the agency prima facie found that there was no basis or rationale behind the coal block allocations.&quot; </p> <p align="justify"> The public display of differences came on a day when government, feeling the pressure of opposition's protest against interference with CBI's investigation, swiftly moved to bring forward the date for the passage of the budget in Lok Sabha to Tuesday to guard against the possibility of a major mishap. The budget was set to be passed over two days beginning May 6. Sources attributed the sudden switch of dates to &quot;caution&quot; on the part of parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath to ensure that the finance bill was not stuck in case Parliament had to be adjourned abruptly. </p> <p align="justify"> The public feuding between the law officers erupted when the government was bracing for the crucial SC hearing on Tuesday on whether law minister Ashwani Kumar, the PMO and the coal ministry sought to subvert CBI's investigation into 'Coalgate'. </p> <p align="justify"> The hearing before a bench led by Justice R M Lodha and comprising Justices Madan Lokur and Kurien Joseph, will essentially look into whether the &quot;vetting&quot; of the status report by the law minister amounted to interfering with CBI's probe and, therefore, an act of impropriety. UPA sources agreed that an adverse determination against the law minister may lead the Congress leadership with little option than to secure Ashwani's papers. </p> <p align="justify"> Contrary to reports in media, the CBI has not submitted to the court that the changes were carried out at the law minister's instance. </p> <p align="justify"> Sources said CBI counsel U U Lalit will present to the court the draft of the status report that the CBI took to the law ministry on March 6, so that Justice Lodha and his brother justices can compare it to the version that was submitted to them on March 8. &quot;We may have to let go of the law minister if the two drafts look significantly different and the contrast leads the court to conclude that Ashwani's intervention was not minor and went beyond proof reading,&quot; said a senior UPA functionary. </p> <p align="justify"> As against this, the PMO and coal ministry, which appeared to have taken a peep into the contents of the status report but stopped short of suggesting amendments, are in safer zone. </p> <p align="justify"> Although governments have rarely been comfortable with judiciary taking charge of a politically significant investigation, UPA leadership on Monday seemed resigned to having to swallow the not-so-sweet pill in order to get out of the tricky situation it was pushed into on Friday when the CBI confirmed to the court that it was made to share the contents of the report with the law minister, as well as the PMO and the coal ministry. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;We can live with an SIT looking into the case and reporting to the SC,&quot; said a senior UPA source on Monday when the opposition kept up the pressure for the law minister's resignation for interfering with the CBI probe, virtually eliminating the prospect of the rest of the budget session accomplishing anything significant besides the passage of the bill. </p> <p align="justify"> On March 12, the court had asked the AG whether he had seen the report and whether he had a copy of it. Vahanvati had said that he did not have a copy of the status report. After that, the court asked Raval whether all the status reports were vetted by the CBI director. After Raval replied in the affirmative, the bench asked, &quot;Are you sharing the information given in the status report with the political executive?&quot; </p> <p align="justify"> Raval said, &quot;No. It is a classified document meant only for the court.&quot; At this, the court had asked the CBI director to file an affidavit to the effect that the status report was vetted by him and was not shared with the political executive. But the director in his two-page affidavit said it was not only shared with law minister but also with PMO and coal ministry officials. </p> <p align="justify"> When the matter is taken up for hearing on Tuesday in the backdrop of the controversy, the bench could consider options of taking over monitoring of the probe into the coal block allocation scam or even appoint a special investigation team to either supervise the CBI's probe. </p> <p align="justify"> The CBI too intends to file documents to show what portions of its probe status report were changed by the &quot;political executive&quot; before its filing in the Supreme Court on March 8. All together the developments in the last two weeks promise an exciting hearing in the SC on Tuesday. </p>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Times of India, 30 April, 2013, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Vetting-of-coal-report-Top-govt-law-officers-indulge-in-blame-game-ahead-of-SC-hearing/articleshow/19792152.cms', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'vetting-of-coal-report-top-govt-law-officers-indulge-in-blame-game-ahead-of-sc-hearing-dhananjay-mahapatra-20796', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 20796, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 3 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 4 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {} ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ '*' => true, 'id' => false ], '[dirty]' => [], '[original]' => [], '[virtual]' => [], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [], '[invalid]' => [], '[repository]' => 'Articles' } $articleid = (int) 20652 $metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Vetting of coal report: Top govt law officers indulge in blame game ahead of SC hearing -Dhananjay Mahapatra' $metaKeywords = 'coal mines,Mining,Corruption,Governance,transparency' $metaDesc = ' -The Times of India Less than 24 hours before the Supreme Court takes up the coal scam hearing on Tuesday, a blame game broke out within the government over who was responsible for incorrectly telling the court that the CBI had...' $disp = '<div align="justify">-The Times of India</div><p align="justify"><br />Less than 24 hours before the Supreme Court takes up the coal scam hearing on Tuesday, a blame game broke out within the government over who was responsible for incorrectly telling the court that the CBI had not shared the contents of its status report on &quot; Coalgate&quot; with the political executive.</p><p align="justify">In a four-page letter to attorney general Goolam Vahanvati, additional solicitor general Harin Raval said he had been made a &quot;scapegoat&quot; for informing the court that the March 8 CBI status report had not been shared with the political executive even though it was the attorney general who gave that statement to the court first.</p><p align="justify">Raval said after the highest law officer had given a statement to the court on March 12 that the probe status report was not shown to the government, he had no option but to &quot;embarrassingly&quot; stick to the same argument.</p><p align="justify">He told Vahanvati that the latter too was present in the meeting at the law minister's office where the alleged vetting of the coal scam investigation status report took place prior to its filing in the Supreme Court. The ASG alleged that despite having full knowledge of the probe status report, the AG decided to tell the court on March 12 that he had no knowledge of it.</p><p align="justify">The letter, with a copy marked to beleaguered law minister Ashwani Kumar, stunned the AG. When contacted by TOI for his response, Vahanvati said, &quot;I am extremely upset to receive it a day before the hearing in the Supreme Court. It is very unfortunate. I never informed the court that it was not shared with the political executive. When the court asked whether I had a copy of the report, I said no. I still do not have a copy of it and we responded to the CBI's allegation on the basis of the court informing that the agency prima facie found that there was no basis or rationale behind the coal block allocations.&quot;</p><p align="justify">The public display of differences came on a day when government, feeling the pressure of opposition's protest against interference with CBI's investigation, swiftly moved to bring forward the date for the passage of the budget in Lok Sabha to Tuesday to guard against the possibility of a major mishap. The budget was set to be passed over two days beginning May 6. Sources attributed the sudden switch of dates to &quot;caution&quot; on the part of parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath to ensure that the finance bill was not stuck in case Parliament had to be adjourned abruptly.</p><p align="justify">The public feuding between the law officers erupted when the government was bracing for the crucial SC hearing on Tuesday on whether law minister Ashwani Kumar, the PMO and the coal ministry sought to subvert CBI's investigation into 'Coalgate'.</p><p align="justify">The hearing before a bench led by Justice R M Lodha and comprising Justices Madan Lokur and Kurien Joseph, will essentially look into whether the &quot;vetting&quot; of the status report by the law minister amounted to interfering with CBI's probe and, therefore, an act of impropriety. UPA sources agreed that an adverse determination against the law minister may lead the Congress leadership with little option than to secure Ashwani's papers.</p><p align="justify">Contrary to reports in media, the CBI has not submitted to the court that the changes were carried out at the law minister's instance.</p><p align="justify">Sources said CBI counsel U U Lalit will present to the court the draft of the status report that the CBI took to the law ministry on March 6, so that Justice Lodha and his brother justices can compare it to the version that was submitted to them on March 8. &quot;We may have to let go of the law minister if the two drafts look significantly different and the contrast leads the court to conclude that Ashwani's intervention was not minor and went beyond proof reading,&quot; said a senior UPA functionary.</p><p align="justify">As against this, the PMO and coal ministry, which appeared to have taken a peep into the contents of the status report but stopped short of suggesting amendments, are in safer zone.</p><p align="justify">Although governments have rarely been comfortable with judiciary taking charge of a politically significant investigation, UPA leadership on Monday seemed resigned to having to swallow the not-so-sweet pill in order to get out of the tricky situation it was pushed into on Friday when the CBI confirmed to the court that it was made to share the contents of the report with the law minister, as well as the PMO and the coal ministry.</p><p align="justify">&quot;We can live with an SIT looking into the case and reporting to the SC,&quot; said a senior UPA source on Monday when the opposition kept up the pressure for the law minister's resignation for interfering with the CBI probe, virtually eliminating the prospect of the rest of the budget session accomplishing anything significant besides the passage of the bill.</p><p align="justify">On March 12, the court had asked the AG whether he had seen the report and whether he had a copy of it. Vahanvati had said that he did not have a copy of the status report. After that, the court asked Raval whether all the status reports were vetted by the CBI director. After Raval replied in the affirmative, the bench asked, &quot;Are you sharing the information given in the status report with the political executive?&quot;</p><p align="justify">Raval said, &quot;No. It is a classified document meant only for the court.&quot; At this, the court had asked the CBI director to file an affidavit to the effect that the status report was vetted by him and was not shared with the political executive. But the director in his two-page affidavit said it was not only shared with law minister but also with PMO and coal ministry officials.</p><p align="justify">When the matter is taken up for hearing on Tuesday in the backdrop of the controversy, the bench could consider options of taking over monitoring of the probe into the coal block allocation scam or even appoint a special investigation team to either supervise the CBI's probe.</p><p align="justify">The CBI too intends to file documents to show what portions of its probe status report were changed by the &quot;political executive&quot; before its filing in the Supreme Court on March 8. All together the developments in the last two weeks promise an exciting hearing in the SC on Tuesday.</p>' $lang = 'English' $SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/' $site_title = 'im4change' $adminprix = 'admin'</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8 Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413 Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374 Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927 Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885 Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/vetting-of-coal-report-top-govt-law-officers-indulge-in-blame-game-ahead-of-sc-hearing-dhananjay-mahapatra-20796.html"/> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/> <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="all"/> <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Vetting of coal report: Top govt law officers indulge in blame game ahead of SC hearing -Dhananjay Mahapatra | Im4change.org</title> <meta name="description" content=" -The Times of India Less than 24 hours before the Supreme Court takes up the coal scam hearing on Tuesday, a blame game broke out within the government over who was responsible for incorrectly telling the court that the CBI had..."/> <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script> <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript"> $(document).ready(function () { var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem var pic_real_width, pic_real_height; $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues .attr("src", $(img).attr("src")) .load(function () { pic_real_width = this.width; // Note: $(this).width() will not pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images. }); }); </script> <style type="text/css"> @media screen { div.divFooter { display: block; } } @media print { .printbutton { display: none !important; } } </style> </head> <body> <table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center"> <tr> <td class="top_bg"> <div class="divFooter"> <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0" alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/> </div> </td> </tr> <tr> <td id="topspace"> </td> </tr> <tr id="topspace"> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%"> <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal"> <strong>Vetting of coal report: Top govt law officers indulge in blame game ahead of SC hearing -Dhananjay Mahapatra</strong></h1> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3"> <div align="justify">-The Times of India</div><p align="justify"><br />Less than 24 hours before the Supreme Court takes up the coal scam hearing on Tuesday, a blame game broke out within the government over who was responsible for incorrectly telling the court that the CBI had not shared the contents of its status report on " Coalgate" with the political executive.</p><p align="justify">In a four-page letter to attorney general Goolam Vahanvati, additional solicitor general Harin Raval said he had been made a "scapegoat" for informing the court that the March 8 CBI status report had not been shared with the political executive even though it was the attorney general who gave that statement to the court first.</p><p align="justify">Raval said after the highest law officer had given a statement to the court on March 12 that the probe status report was not shown to the government, he had no option but to "embarrassingly" stick to the same argument.</p><p align="justify">He told Vahanvati that the latter too was present in the meeting at the law minister's office where the alleged vetting of the coal scam investigation status report took place prior to its filing in the Supreme Court. The ASG alleged that despite having full knowledge of the probe status report, the AG decided to tell the court on March 12 that he had no knowledge of it.</p><p align="justify">The letter, with a copy marked to beleaguered law minister Ashwani Kumar, stunned the AG. When contacted by TOI for his response, Vahanvati said, "I am extremely upset to receive it a day before the hearing in the Supreme Court. It is very unfortunate. I never informed the court that it was not shared with the political executive. When the court asked whether I had a copy of the report, I said no. I still do not have a copy of it and we responded to the CBI's allegation on the basis of the court informing that the agency prima facie found that there was no basis or rationale behind the coal block allocations."</p><p align="justify">The public display of differences came on a day when government, feeling the pressure of opposition's protest against interference with CBI's investigation, swiftly moved to bring forward the date for the passage of the budget in Lok Sabha to Tuesday to guard against the possibility of a major mishap. The budget was set to be passed over two days beginning May 6. Sources attributed the sudden switch of dates to "caution" on the part of parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath to ensure that the finance bill was not stuck in case Parliament had to be adjourned abruptly.</p><p align="justify">The public feuding between the law officers erupted when the government was bracing for the crucial SC hearing on Tuesday on whether law minister Ashwani Kumar, the PMO and the coal ministry sought to subvert CBI's investigation into 'Coalgate'.</p><p align="justify">The hearing before a bench led by Justice R M Lodha and comprising Justices Madan Lokur and Kurien Joseph, will essentially look into whether the "vetting" of the status report by the law minister amounted to interfering with CBI's probe and, therefore, an act of impropriety. UPA sources agreed that an adverse determination against the law minister may lead the Congress leadership with little option than to secure Ashwani's papers.</p><p align="justify">Contrary to reports in media, the CBI has not submitted to the court that the changes were carried out at the law minister's instance.</p><p align="justify">Sources said CBI counsel U U Lalit will present to the court the draft of the status report that the CBI took to the law ministry on March 6, so that Justice Lodha and his brother justices can compare it to the version that was submitted to them on March 8. "We may have to let go of the law minister if the two drafts look significantly different and the contrast leads the court to conclude that Ashwani's intervention was not minor and went beyond proof reading," said a senior UPA functionary.</p><p align="justify">As against this, the PMO and coal ministry, which appeared to have taken a peep into the contents of the status report but stopped short of suggesting amendments, are in safer zone.</p><p align="justify">Although governments have rarely been comfortable with judiciary taking charge of a politically significant investigation, UPA leadership on Monday seemed resigned to having to swallow the not-so-sweet pill in order to get out of the tricky situation it was pushed into on Friday when the CBI confirmed to the court that it was made to share the contents of the report with the law minister, as well as the PMO and the coal ministry.</p><p align="justify">"We can live with an SIT looking into the case and reporting to the SC," said a senior UPA source on Monday when the opposition kept up the pressure for the law minister's resignation for interfering with the CBI probe, virtually eliminating the prospect of the rest of the budget session accomplishing anything significant besides the passage of the bill.</p><p align="justify">On March 12, the court had asked the AG whether he had seen the report and whether he had a copy of it. Vahanvati had said that he did not have a copy of the status report. After that, the court asked Raval whether all the status reports were vetted by the CBI director. After Raval replied in the affirmative, the bench asked, "Are you sharing the information given in the status report with the political executive?"</p><p align="justify">Raval said, "No. It is a classified document meant only for the court." At this, the court had asked the CBI director to file an affidavit to the effect that the status report was vetted by him and was not shared with the political executive. But the director in his two-page affidavit said it was not only shared with law minister but also with PMO and coal ministry officials.</p><p align="justify">When the matter is taken up for hearing on Tuesday in the backdrop of the controversy, the bench could consider options of taking over monitoring of the probe into the coal block allocation scam or even appoint a special investigation team to either supervise the CBI's probe.</p><p align="justify">The CBI too intends to file documents to show what portions of its probe status report were changed by the "political executive" before its filing in the Supreme Court on March 8. All together the developments in the last two weeks promise an exciting hearing in the SC on Tuesday.</p> </font> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> </table></body> </html>' } $reasonPhrase = 'OK'header - [internal], line ?? Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitStatusLine() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 148 Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 54 Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141 [main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39
Warning (2): Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/brlfuser/public_html/vendor/cakephp/cakephp/src/Error/Debugger.php:853) [CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181]Notice (8): Undefined variable: urlPrefix [APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8]Code Context$value
), $first);
$first = false;
$response = object(Cake\Http\Response) { 'status' => (int) 200, 'contentType' => 'text/html', 'headers' => [ 'Content-Type' => [ [maximum depth reached] ] ], 'file' => null, 'fileRange' => [], 'cookies' => object(Cake\Http\Cookie\CookieCollection) {}, 'cacheDirectives' => [], 'body' => '<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> <link rel="canonical" href="https://im4change.in/<pre class="cake-error"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr68144e090d0de-trace').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr68144e090d0de-trace').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none');"><b>Notice</b> (8)</a>: Undefined variable: urlPrefix [<b>APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp</b>, line <b>8</b>]<div id="cakeErr68144e090d0de-trace" class="cake-stack-trace" style="display: none;"><a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr68144e090d0de-code').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr68144e090d0de-code').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Code</a> <a href="javascript:void(0);" onclick="document.getElementById('cakeErr68144e090d0de-context').style.display = (document.getElementById('cakeErr68144e090d0de-context').style.display == 'none' ? '' : 'none')">Context</a><pre id="cakeErr68144e090d0de-code" class="cake-code-dump" style="display: none;"><code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"></span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">head</span><span style="color: #007700">> </span></span></code> <span class="code-highlight"><code><span style="color: #000000"> <link rel="canonical" href="<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">Configure</span><span style="color: #007700">::</span><span style="color: #0000BB">read</span><span style="color: #007700">(</span><span style="color: #DD0000">'SITE_URL'</span><span style="color: #007700">); </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$urlPrefix</span><span style="color: #007700">;</span><span style="color: #0000BB">?><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">category</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">slug</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>/<span style="color: #0000BB"><?php </span><span style="color: #007700">echo </span><span style="color: #0000BB">$article_current</span><span style="color: #007700">-></span><span style="color: #0000BB">seo_url</span><span style="color: #007700">; </span><span style="color: #0000BB">?></span>.html"/> </span></code></span> <code><span style="color: #000000"><span style="color: #0000BB"> </span><span style="color: #007700"><</span><span style="color: #0000BB">meta http</span><span style="color: #007700">-</span><span style="color: #0000BB">equiv</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"Content-Type" </span><span style="color: #0000BB">content</span><span style="color: #007700">=</span><span style="color: #DD0000">"text/html; charset=utf-8"</span><span style="color: #007700">/> </span></span></code></pre><pre id="cakeErr68144e090d0de-context" class="cake-context" style="display: none;">$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp' $dataForView = [ 'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 20652, 'title' => 'Vetting of coal report: Top govt law officers indulge in blame game ahead of SC hearing -Dhananjay Mahapatra', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div align="justify"> -The Times of India </div> <p align="justify"> <br /> Less than 24 hours before the Supreme Court takes up the coal scam hearing on Tuesday, a blame game broke out within the government over who was responsible for incorrectly telling the court that the CBI had not shared the contents of its status report on &quot; Coalgate&quot; with the political executive. </p> <p align="justify"> In a four-page letter to attorney general Goolam Vahanvati, additional solicitor general Harin Raval said he had been made a &quot;scapegoat&quot; for informing the court that the March 8 CBI status report had not been shared with the political executive even though it was the attorney general who gave that statement to the court first. </p> <p align="justify"> Raval said after the highest law officer had given a statement to the court on March 12 that the probe status report was not shown to the government, he had no option but to &quot;embarrassingly&quot; stick to the same argument. </p> <p align="justify"> He told Vahanvati that the latter too was present in the meeting at the law minister's office where the alleged vetting of the coal scam investigation status report took place prior to its filing in the Supreme Court. The ASG alleged that despite having full knowledge of the probe status report, the AG decided to tell the court on March 12 that he had no knowledge of it. </p> <p align="justify"> The letter, with a copy marked to beleaguered law minister Ashwani Kumar, stunned the AG. When contacted by TOI for his response, Vahanvati said, &quot;I am extremely upset to receive it a day before the hearing in the Supreme Court. It is very unfortunate. I never informed the court that it was not shared with the political executive. When the court asked whether I had a copy of the report, I said no. I still do not have a copy of it and we responded to the CBI's allegation on the basis of the court informing that the agency prima facie found that there was no basis or rationale behind the coal block allocations.&quot; </p> <p align="justify"> The public display of differences came on a day when government, feeling the pressure of opposition's protest against interference with CBI's investigation, swiftly moved to bring forward the date for the passage of the budget in Lok Sabha to Tuesday to guard against the possibility of a major mishap. The budget was set to be passed over two days beginning May 6. Sources attributed the sudden switch of dates to &quot;caution&quot; on the part of parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath to ensure that the finance bill was not stuck in case Parliament had to be adjourned abruptly. </p> <p align="justify"> The public feuding between the law officers erupted when the government was bracing for the crucial SC hearing on Tuesday on whether law minister Ashwani Kumar, the PMO and the coal ministry sought to subvert CBI's investigation into 'Coalgate'. </p> <p align="justify"> The hearing before a bench led by Justice R M Lodha and comprising Justices Madan Lokur and Kurien Joseph, will essentially look into whether the &quot;vetting&quot; of the status report by the law minister amounted to interfering with CBI's probe and, therefore, an act of impropriety. UPA sources agreed that an adverse determination against the law minister may lead the Congress leadership with little option than to secure Ashwani's papers. </p> <p align="justify"> Contrary to reports in media, the CBI has not submitted to the court that the changes were carried out at the law minister's instance. </p> <p align="justify"> Sources said CBI counsel U U Lalit will present to the court the draft of the status report that the CBI took to the law ministry on March 6, so that Justice Lodha and his brother justices can compare it to the version that was submitted to them on March 8. &quot;We may have to let go of the law minister if the two drafts look significantly different and the contrast leads the court to conclude that Ashwani's intervention was not minor and went beyond proof reading,&quot; said a senior UPA functionary. </p> <p align="justify"> As against this, the PMO and coal ministry, which appeared to have taken a peep into the contents of the status report but stopped short of suggesting amendments, are in safer zone. </p> <p align="justify"> Although governments have rarely been comfortable with judiciary taking charge of a politically significant investigation, UPA leadership on Monday seemed resigned to having to swallow the not-so-sweet pill in order to get out of the tricky situation it was pushed into on Friday when the CBI confirmed to the court that it was made to share the contents of the report with the law minister, as well as the PMO and the coal ministry. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;We can live with an SIT looking into the case and reporting to the SC,&quot; said a senior UPA source on Monday when the opposition kept up the pressure for the law minister's resignation for interfering with the CBI probe, virtually eliminating the prospect of the rest of the budget session accomplishing anything significant besides the passage of the bill. </p> <p align="justify"> On March 12, the court had asked the AG whether he had seen the report and whether he had a copy of it. Vahanvati had said that he did not have a copy of the status report. After that, the court asked Raval whether all the status reports were vetted by the CBI director. After Raval replied in the affirmative, the bench asked, &quot;Are you sharing the information given in the status report with the political executive?&quot; </p> <p align="justify"> Raval said, &quot;No. It is a classified document meant only for the court.&quot; At this, the court had asked the CBI director to file an affidavit to the effect that the status report was vetted by him and was not shared with the political executive. But the director in his two-page affidavit said it was not only shared with law minister but also with PMO and coal ministry officials. </p> <p align="justify"> When the matter is taken up for hearing on Tuesday in the backdrop of the controversy, the bench could consider options of taking over monitoring of the probe into the coal block allocation scam or even appoint a special investigation team to either supervise the CBI's probe. </p> <p align="justify"> The CBI too intends to file documents to show what portions of its probe status report were changed by the &quot;political executive&quot; before its filing in the Supreme Court on March 8. All together the developments in the last two weeks promise an exciting hearing in the SC on Tuesday. </p>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Times of India, 30 April, 2013, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Vetting-of-coal-report-Top-govt-law-officers-indulge-in-blame-game-ahead-of-SC-hearing/articleshow/19792152.cms', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'vetting-of-coal-report-top-govt-law-officers-indulge-in-blame-game-ahead-of-sc-hearing-dhananjay-mahapatra-20796', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 20796, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], '[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[repository]' => 'Articles' }, 'articleid' => (int) 20652, 'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Vetting of coal report: Top govt law officers indulge in blame game ahead of SC hearing -Dhananjay Mahapatra', 'metaKeywords' => 'coal mines,Mining,Corruption,Governance,transparency', 'metaDesc' => ' -The Times of India Less than 24 hours before the Supreme Court takes up the coal scam hearing on Tuesday, a blame game broke out within the government over who was responsible for incorrectly telling the court that the CBI had...', 'disp' => '<div align="justify">-The Times of India</div><p align="justify"><br />Less than 24 hours before the Supreme Court takes up the coal scam hearing on Tuesday, a blame game broke out within the government over who was responsible for incorrectly telling the court that the CBI had not shared the contents of its status report on &quot; Coalgate&quot; with the political executive.</p><p align="justify">In a four-page letter to attorney general Goolam Vahanvati, additional solicitor general Harin Raval said he had been made a &quot;scapegoat&quot; for informing the court that the March 8 CBI status report had not been shared with the political executive even though it was the attorney general who gave that statement to the court first.</p><p align="justify">Raval said after the highest law officer had given a statement to the court on March 12 that the probe status report was not shown to the government, he had no option but to &quot;embarrassingly&quot; stick to the same argument.</p><p align="justify">He told Vahanvati that the latter too was present in the meeting at the law minister's office where the alleged vetting of the coal scam investigation status report took place prior to its filing in the Supreme Court. The ASG alleged that despite having full knowledge of the probe status report, the AG decided to tell the court on March 12 that he had no knowledge of it.</p><p align="justify">The letter, with a copy marked to beleaguered law minister Ashwani Kumar, stunned the AG. When contacted by TOI for his response, Vahanvati said, &quot;I am extremely upset to receive it a day before the hearing in the Supreme Court. It is very unfortunate. I never informed the court that it was not shared with the political executive. When the court asked whether I had a copy of the report, I said no. I still do not have a copy of it and we responded to the CBI's allegation on the basis of the court informing that the agency prima facie found that there was no basis or rationale behind the coal block allocations.&quot;</p><p align="justify">The public display of differences came on a day when government, feeling the pressure of opposition's protest against interference with CBI's investigation, swiftly moved to bring forward the date for the passage of the budget in Lok Sabha to Tuesday to guard against the possibility of a major mishap. The budget was set to be passed over two days beginning May 6. Sources attributed the sudden switch of dates to &quot;caution&quot; on the part of parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath to ensure that the finance bill was not stuck in case Parliament had to be adjourned abruptly.</p><p align="justify">The public feuding between the law officers erupted when the government was bracing for the crucial SC hearing on Tuesday on whether law minister Ashwani Kumar, the PMO and the coal ministry sought to subvert CBI's investigation into 'Coalgate'.</p><p align="justify">The hearing before a bench led by Justice R M Lodha and comprising Justices Madan Lokur and Kurien Joseph, will essentially look into whether the &quot;vetting&quot; of the status report by the law minister amounted to interfering with CBI's probe and, therefore, an act of impropriety. UPA sources agreed that an adverse determination against the law minister may lead the Congress leadership with little option than to secure Ashwani's papers.</p><p align="justify">Contrary to reports in media, the CBI has not submitted to the court that the changes were carried out at the law minister's instance.</p><p align="justify">Sources said CBI counsel U U Lalit will present to the court the draft of the status report that the CBI took to the law ministry on March 6, so that Justice Lodha and his brother justices can compare it to the version that was submitted to them on March 8. &quot;We may have to let go of the law minister if the two drafts look significantly different and the contrast leads the court to conclude that Ashwani's intervention was not minor and went beyond proof reading,&quot; said a senior UPA functionary.</p><p align="justify">As against this, the PMO and coal ministry, which appeared to have taken a peep into the contents of the status report but stopped short of suggesting amendments, are in safer zone.</p><p align="justify">Although governments have rarely been comfortable with judiciary taking charge of a politically significant investigation, UPA leadership on Monday seemed resigned to having to swallow the not-so-sweet pill in order to get out of the tricky situation it was pushed into on Friday when the CBI confirmed to the court that it was made to share the contents of the report with the law minister, as well as the PMO and the coal ministry.</p><p align="justify">&quot;We can live with an SIT looking into the case and reporting to the SC,&quot; said a senior UPA source on Monday when the opposition kept up the pressure for the law minister's resignation for interfering with the CBI probe, virtually eliminating the prospect of the rest of the budget session accomplishing anything significant besides the passage of the bill.</p><p align="justify">On March 12, the court had asked the AG whether he had seen the report and whether he had a copy of it. Vahanvati had said that he did not have a copy of the status report. After that, the court asked Raval whether all the status reports were vetted by the CBI director. After Raval replied in the affirmative, the bench asked, &quot;Are you sharing the information given in the status report with the political executive?&quot;</p><p align="justify">Raval said, &quot;No. It is a classified document meant only for the court.&quot; At this, the court had asked the CBI director to file an affidavit to the effect that the status report was vetted by him and was not shared with the political executive. But the director in his two-page affidavit said it was not only shared with law minister but also with PMO and coal ministry officials.</p><p align="justify">When the matter is taken up for hearing on Tuesday in the backdrop of the controversy, the bench could consider options of taking over monitoring of the probe into the coal block allocation scam or even appoint a special investigation team to either supervise the CBI's probe.</p><p align="justify">The CBI too intends to file documents to show what portions of its probe status report were changed by the &quot;political executive&quot; before its filing in the Supreme Court on March 8. All together the developments in the last two weeks promise an exciting hearing in the SC on Tuesday.</p>', 'lang' => 'English', 'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/', 'site_title' => 'im4change', 'adminprix' => 'admin' ] $article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 20652, 'title' => 'Vetting of coal report: Top govt law officers indulge in blame game ahead of SC hearing -Dhananjay Mahapatra', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div align="justify"> -The Times of India </div> <p align="justify"> <br /> Less than 24 hours before the Supreme Court takes up the coal scam hearing on Tuesday, a blame game broke out within the government over who was responsible for incorrectly telling the court that the CBI had not shared the contents of its status report on &quot; Coalgate&quot; with the political executive. </p> <p align="justify"> In a four-page letter to attorney general Goolam Vahanvati, additional solicitor general Harin Raval said he had been made a &quot;scapegoat&quot; for informing the court that the March 8 CBI status report had not been shared with the political executive even though it was the attorney general who gave that statement to the court first. </p> <p align="justify"> Raval said after the highest law officer had given a statement to the court on March 12 that the probe status report was not shown to the government, he had no option but to &quot;embarrassingly&quot; stick to the same argument. </p> <p align="justify"> He told Vahanvati that the latter too was present in the meeting at the law minister's office where the alleged vetting of the coal scam investigation status report took place prior to its filing in the Supreme Court. The ASG alleged that despite having full knowledge of the probe status report, the AG decided to tell the court on March 12 that he had no knowledge of it. </p> <p align="justify"> The letter, with a copy marked to beleaguered law minister Ashwani Kumar, stunned the AG. When contacted by TOI for his response, Vahanvati said, &quot;I am extremely upset to receive it a day before the hearing in the Supreme Court. It is very unfortunate. I never informed the court that it was not shared with the political executive. When the court asked whether I had a copy of the report, I said no. I still do not have a copy of it and we responded to the CBI's allegation on the basis of the court informing that the agency prima facie found that there was no basis or rationale behind the coal block allocations.&quot; </p> <p align="justify"> The public display of differences came on a day when government, feeling the pressure of opposition's protest against interference with CBI's investigation, swiftly moved to bring forward the date for the passage of the budget in Lok Sabha to Tuesday to guard against the possibility of a major mishap. The budget was set to be passed over two days beginning May 6. Sources attributed the sudden switch of dates to &quot;caution&quot; on the part of parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath to ensure that the finance bill was not stuck in case Parliament had to be adjourned abruptly. </p> <p align="justify"> The public feuding between the law officers erupted when the government was bracing for the crucial SC hearing on Tuesday on whether law minister Ashwani Kumar, the PMO and the coal ministry sought to subvert CBI's investigation into 'Coalgate'. </p> <p align="justify"> The hearing before a bench led by Justice R M Lodha and comprising Justices Madan Lokur and Kurien Joseph, will essentially look into whether the &quot;vetting&quot; of the status report by the law minister amounted to interfering with CBI's probe and, therefore, an act of impropriety. UPA sources agreed that an adverse determination against the law minister may lead the Congress leadership with little option than to secure Ashwani's papers. </p> <p align="justify"> Contrary to reports in media, the CBI has not submitted to the court that the changes were carried out at the law minister's instance. </p> <p align="justify"> Sources said CBI counsel U U Lalit will present to the court the draft of the status report that the CBI took to the law ministry on March 6, so that Justice Lodha and his brother justices can compare it to the version that was submitted to them on March 8. &quot;We may have to let go of the law minister if the two drafts look significantly different and the contrast leads the court to conclude that Ashwani's intervention was not minor and went beyond proof reading,&quot; said a senior UPA functionary. </p> <p align="justify"> As against this, the PMO and coal ministry, which appeared to have taken a peep into the contents of the status report but stopped short of suggesting amendments, are in safer zone. </p> <p align="justify"> Although governments have rarely been comfortable with judiciary taking charge of a politically significant investigation, UPA leadership on Monday seemed resigned to having to swallow the not-so-sweet pill in order to get out of the tricky situation it was pushed into on Friday when the CBI confirmed to the court that it was made to share the contents of the report with the law minister, as well as the PMO and the coal ministry. </p> <p align="justify"> &quot;We can live with an SIT looking into the case and reporting to the SC,&quot; said a senior UPA source on Monday when the opposition kept up the pressure for the law minister's resignation for interfering with the CBI probe, virtually eliminating the prospect of the rest of the budget session accomplishing anything significant besides the passage of the bill. </p> <p align="justify"> On March 12, the court had asked the AG whether he had seen the report and whether he had a copy of it. Vahanvati had said that he did not have a copy of the status report. After that, the court asked Raval whether all the status reports were vetted by the CBI director. After Raval replied in the affirmative, the bench asked, &quot;Are you sharing the information given in the status report with the political executive?&quot; </p> <p align="justify"> Raval said, &quot;No. It is a classified document meant only for the court.&quot; At this, the court had asked the CBI director to file an affidavit to the effect that the status report was vetted by him and was not shared with the political executive. But the director in his two-page affidavit said it was not only shared with law minister but also with PMO and coal ministry officials. </p> <p align="justify"> When the matter is taken up for hearing on Tuesday in the backdrop of the controversy, the bench could consider options of taking over monitoring of the probe into the coal block allocation scam or even appoint a special investigation team to either supervise the CBI's probe. </p> <p align="justify"> The CBI too intends to file documents to show what portions of its probe status report were changed by the &quot;political executive&quot; before its filing in the Supreme Court on March 8. All together the developments in the last two weeks promise an exciting hearing in the SC on Tuesday. </p>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Times of India, 30 April, 2013, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Vetting-of-coal-report-Top-govt-law-officers-indulge-in-blame-game-ahead-of-SC-hearing/articleshow/19792152.cms', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'vetting-of-coal-report-top-govt-law-officers-indulge-in-blame-game-ahead-of-sc-hearing-dhananjay-mahapatra-20796', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 20796, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 3 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 4 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {} ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ '*' => true, 'id' => false ], '[dirty]' => [], '[original]' => [], '[virtual]' => [], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [], '[invalid]' => [], '[repository]' => 'Articles' } $articleid = (int) 20652 $metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Vetting of coal report: Top govt law officers indulge in blame game ahead of SC hearing -Dhananjay Mahapatra' $metaKeywords = 'coal mines,Mining,Corruption,Governance,transparency' $metaDesc = ' -The Times of India Less than 24 hours before the Supreme Court takes up the coal scam hearing on Tuesday, a blame game broke out within the government over who was responsible for incorrectly telling the court that the CBI had...' $disp = '<div align="justify">-The Times of India</div><p align="justify"><br />Less than 24 hours before the Supreme Court takes up the coal scam hearing on Tuesday, a blame game broke out within the government over who was responsible for incorrectly telling the court that the CBI had not shared the contents of its status report on &quot; Coalgate&quot; with the political executive.</p><p align="justify">In a four-page letter to attorney general Goolam Vahanvati, additional solicitor general Harin Raval said he had been made a &quot;scapegoat&quot; for informing the court that the March 8 CBI status report had not been shared with the political executive even though it was the attorney general who gave that statement to the court first.</p><p align="justify">Raval said after the highest law officer had given a statement to the court on March 12 that the probe status report was not shown to the government, he had no option but to &quot;embarrassingly&quot; stick to the same argument.</p><p align="justify">He told Vahanvati that the latter too was present in the meeting at the law minister's office where the alleged vetting of the coal scam investigation status report took place prior to its filing in the Supreme Court. The ASG alleged that despite having full knowledge of the probe status report, the AG decided to tell the court on March 12 that he had no knowledge of it.</p><p align="justify">The letter, with a copy marked to beleaguered law minister Ashwani Kumar, stunned the AG. When contacted by TOI for his response, Vahanvati said, &quot;I am extremely upset to receive it a day before the hearing in the Supreme Court. It is very unfortunate. I never informed the court that it was not shared with the political executive. When the court asked whether I had a copy of the report, I said no. I still do not have a copy of it and we responded to the CBI's allegation on the basis of the court informing that the agency prima facie found that there was no basis or rationale behind the coal block allocations.&quot;</p><p align="justify">The public display of differences came on a day when government, feeling the pressure of opposition's protest against interference with CBI's investigation, swiftly moved to bring forward the date for the passage of the budget in Lok Sabha to Tuesday to guard against the possibility of a major mishap. The budget was set to be passed over two days beginning May 6. Sources attributed the sudden switch of dates to &quot;caution&quot; on the part of parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath to ensure that the finance bill was not stuck in case Parliament had to be adjourned abruptly.</p><p align="justify">The public feuding between the law officers erupted when the government was bracing for the crucial SC hearing on Tuesday on whether law minister Ashwani Kumar, the PMO and the coal ministry sought to subvert CBI's investigation into 'Coalgate'.</p><p align="justify">The hearing before a bench led by Justice R M Lodha and comprising Justices Madan Lokur and Kurien Joseph, will essentially look into whether the &quot;vetting&quot; of the status report by the law minister amounted to interfering with CBI's probe and, therefore, an act of impropriety. UPA sources agreed that an adverse determination against the law minister may lead the Congress leadership with little option than to secure Ashwani's papers.</p><p align="justify">Contrary to reports in media, the CBI has not submitted to the court that the changes were carried out at the law minister's instance.</p><p align="justify">Sources said CBI counsel U U Lalit will present to the court the draft of the status report that the CBI took to the law ministry on March 6, so that Justice Lodha and his brother justices can compare it to the version that was submitted to them on March 8. &quot;We may have to let go of the law minister if the two drafts look significantly different and the contrast leads the court to conclude that Ashwani's intervention was not minor and went beyond proof reading,&quot; said a senior UPA functionary.</p><p align="justify">As against this, the PMO and coal ministry, which appeared to have taken a peep into the contents of the status report but stopped short of suggesting amendments, are in safer zone.</p><p align="justify">Although governments have rarely been comfortable with judiciary taking charge of a politically significant investigation, UPA leadership on Monday seemed resigned to having to swallow the not-so-sweet pill in order to get out of the tricky situation it was pushed into on Friday when the CBI confirmed to the court that it was made to share the contents of the report with the law minister, as well as the PMO and the coal ministry.</p><p align="justify">&quot;We can live with an SIT looking into the case and reporting to the SC,&quot; said a senior UPA source on Monday when the opposition kept up the pressure for the law minister's resignation for interfering with the CBI probe, virtually eliminating the prospect of the rest of the budget session accomplishing anything significant besides the passage of the bill.</p><p align="justify">On March 12, the court had asked the AG whether he had seen the report and whether he had a copy of it. Vahanvati had said that he did not have a copy of the status report. After that, the court asked Raval whether all the status reports were vetted by the CBI director. After Raval replied in the affirmative, the bench asked, &quot;Are you sharing the information given in the status report with the political executive?&quot;</p><p align="justify">Raval said, &quot;No. It is a classified document meant only for the court.&quot; At this, the court had asked the CBI director to file an affidavit to the effect that the status report was vetted by him and was not shared with the political executive. But the director in his two-page affidavit said it was not only shared with law minister but also with PMO and coal ministry officials.</p><p align="justify">When the matter is taken up for hearing on Tuesday in the backdrop of the controversy, the bench could consider options of taking over monitoring of the probe into the coal block allocation scam or even appoint a special investigation team to either supervise the CBI's probe.</p><p align="justify">The CBI too intends to file documents to show what portions of its probe status report were changed by the &quot;political executive&quot; before its filing in the Supreme Court on March 8. All together the developments in the last two weeks promise an exciting hearing in the SC on Tuesday.</p>' $lang = 'English' $SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/' $site_title = 'im4change' $adminprix = 'admin'</pre><pre class="stack-trace">include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8 Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413 Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374 Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927 Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885 Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51</pre></div></pre>latest-news-updates/vetting-of-coal-report-top-govt-law-officers-indulge-in-blame-game-ahead-of-sc-hearing-dhananjay-mahapatra-20796.html"/> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/> <link href="https://im4change.in/css/control.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" media="all"/> <title>LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Vetting of coal report: Top govt law officers indulge in blame game ahead of SC hearing -Dhananjay Mahapatra | Im4change.org</title> <meta name="description" content=" -The Times of India Less than 24 hours before the Supreme Court takes up the coal scam hearing on Tuesday, a blame game broke out within the government over who was responsible for incorrectly telling the court that the CBI had..."/> <script src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-1.10.2.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://im4change.in/js/jquery-migrate.min.js"></script> <script language="javascript" type="text/javascript"> $(document).ready(function () { var img = $("img")[0]; // Get my img elem var pic_real_width, pic_real_height; $("<img/>") // Make in memory copy of image to avoid css issues .attr("src", $(img).attr("src")) .load(function () { pic_real_width = this.width; // Note: $(this).width() will not pic_real_height = this.height; // work for in memory images. }); }); </script> <style type="text/css"> @media screen { div.divFooter { display: block; } } @media print { .printbutton { display: none !important; } } </style> </head> <body> <table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" border="0" width="98%" align="center"> <tr> <td class="top_bg"> <div class="divFooter"> <img src="https://im4change.in/images/logo1.jpg" height="59" border="0" alt="Resource centre on India's rural distress" style="padding-top:14px;"/> </div> </td> </tr> <tr> <td id="topspace"> </td> </tr> <tr id="topspace"> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-bottom:1px solid #000; padding-top:10px;" class="printbutton"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%"> <h1 class="news_headlines" style="font-style:normal"> <strong>Vetting of coal report: Top govt law officers indulge in blame game ahead of SC hearing -Dhananjay Mahapatra</strong></h1> </td> </tr> <tr> <td width="100%" style="font-family:Arial, 'Segoe Script', 'Segoe UI', sans-serif, serif"><font size="3"> <div align="justify">-The Times of India</div><p align="justify"><br />Less than 24 hours before the Supreme Court takes up the coal scam hearing on Tuesday, a blame game broke out within the government over who was responsible for incorrectly telling the court that the CBI had not shared the contents of its status report on " Coalgate" with the political executive.</p><p align="justify">In a four-page letter to attorney general Goolam Vahanvati, additional solicitor general Harin Raval said he had been made a "scapegoat" for informing the court that the March 8 CBI status report had not been shared with the political executive even though it was the attorney general who gave that statement to the court first.</p><p align="justify">Raval said after the highest law officer had given a statement to the court on March 12 that the probe status report was not shown to the government, he had no option but to "embarrassingly" stick to the same argument.</p><p align="justify">He told Vahanvati that the latter too was present in the meeting at the law minister's office where the alleged vetting of the coal scam investigation status report took place prior to its filing in the Supreme Court. The ASG alleged that despite having full knowledge of the probe status report, the AG decided to tell the court on March 12 that he had no knowledge of it.</p><p align="justify">The letter, with a copy marked to beleaguered law minister Ashwani Kumar, stunned the AG. When contacted by TOI for his response, Vahanvati said, "I am extremely upset to receive it a day before the hearing in the Supreme Court. It is very unfortunate. I never informed the court that it was not shared with the political executive. When the court asked whether I had a copy of the report, I said no. I still do not have a copy of it and we responded to the CBI's allegation on the basis of the court informing that the agency prima facie found that there was no basis or rationale behind the coal block allocations."</p><p align="justify">The public display of differences came on a day when government, feeling the pressure of opposition's protest against interference with CBI's investigation, swiftly moved to bring forward the date for the passage of the budget in Lok Sabha to Tuesday to guard against the possibility of a major mishap. The budget was set to be passed over two days beginning May 6. Sources attributed the sudden switch of dates to "caution" on the part of parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath to ensure that the finance bill was not stuck in case Parliament had to be adjourned abruptly.</p><p align="justify">The public feuding between the law officers erupted when the government was bracing for the crucial SC hearing on Tuesday on whether law minister Ashwani Kumar, the PMO and the coal ministry sought to subvert CBI's investigation into 'Coalgate'.</p><p align="justify">The hearing before a bench led by Justice R M Lodha and comprising Justices Madan Lokur and Kurien Joseph, will essentially look into whether the "vetting" of the status report by the law minister amounted to interfering with CBI's probe and, therefore, an act of impropriety. UPA sources agreed that an adverse determination against the law minister may lead the Congress leadership with little option than to secure Ashwani's papers.</p><p align="justify">Contrary to reports in media, the CBI has not submitted to the court that the changes were carried out at the law minister's instance.</p><p align="justify">Sources said CBI counsel U U Lalit will present to the court the draft of the status report that the CBI took to the law ministry on March 6, so that Justice Lodha and his brother justices can compare it to the version that was submitted to them on March 8. "We may have to let go of the law minister if the two drafts look significantly different and the contrast leads the court to conclude that Ashwani's intervention was not minor and went beyond proof reading," said a senior UPA functionary.</p><p align="justify">As against this, the PMO and coal ministry, which appeared to have taken a peep into the contents of the status report but stopped short of suggesting amendments, are in safer zone.</p><p align="justify">Although governments have rarely been comfortable with judiciary taking charge of a politically significant investigation, UPA leadership on Monday seemed resigned to having to swallow the not-so-sweet pill in order to get out of the tricky situation it was pushed into on Friday when the CBI confirmed to the court that it was made to share the contents of the report with the law minister, as well as the PMO and the coal ministry.</p><p align="justify">"We can live with an SIT looking into the case and reporting to the SC," said a senior UPA source on Monday when the opposition kept up the pressure for the law minister's resignation for interfering with the CBI probe, virtually eliminating the prospect of the rest of the budget session accomplishing anything significant besides the passage of the bill.</p><p align="justify">On March 12, the court had asked the AG whether he had seen the report and whether he had a copy of it. Vahanvati had said that he did not have a copy of the status report. After that, the court asked Raval whether all the status reports were vetted by the CBI director. After Raval replied in the affirmative, the bench asked, "Are you sharing the information given in the status report with the political executive?"</p><p align="justify">Raval said, "No. It is a classified document meant only for the court." At this, the court had asked the CBI director to file an affidavit to the effect that the status report was vetted by him and was not shared with the political executive. But the director in his two-page affidavit said it was not only shared with law minister but also with PMO and coal ministry officials.</p><p align="justify">When the matter is taken up for hearing on Tuesday in the backdrop of the controversy, the bench could consider options of taking over monitoring of the probe into the coal block allocation scam or even appoint a special investigation team to either supervise the CBI's probe.</p><p align="justify">The CBI too intends to file documents to show what portions of its probe status report were changed by the "political executive" before its filing in the Supreme Court on March 8. All together the developments in the last two weeks promise an exciting hearing in the SC on Tuesday.</p> </font> </td> </tr> <tr> <td> </td> </tr> <tr> <td height="50" style="border-top:1px solid #000; border-bottom:1px solid #000;padding-top:10px;"> <form><input type="button" value=" Print this page " onclick="window.print();return false;"/></form> </td> </tr> </table></body> </html>' } $cookies = [] $values = [ (int) 0 => 'text/html; charset=UTF-8' ] $name = 'Content-Type' $first = true $value = 'text/html; charset=UTF-8'header - [internal], line ?? Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emitHeaders() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 181 Cake\Http\ResponseEmitter::emit() - CORE/src/Http/ResponseEmitter.php, line 55 Cake\Http\Server::emit() - CORE/src/Http/Server.php, line 141 [main] - ROOT/webroot/index.php, line 39
<head>
<link rel="canonical" href="<?php echo Configure::read('SITE_URL'); ?><?php echo $urlPrefix;?><?php echo $article_current->category->slug; ?>/<?php echo $article_current->seo_url; ?>.html"/>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
$viewFile = '/home/brlfuser/public_html/src/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp' $dataForView = [ 'article_current' => object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 20652, 'title' => 'Vetting of coal report: Top govt law officers indulge in blame game ahead of SC hearing -Dhananjay Mahapatra', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div align="justify"> -The Times of India </div> <p align="justify"> <br /> Less than 24 hours before the Supreme Court takes up the coal scam hearing on Tuesday, a blame game broke out within the government over who was responsible for incorrectly telling the court that the CBI had not shared the contents of its status report on " Coalgate" with the political executive. </p> <p align="justify"> In a four-page letter to attorney general Goolam Vahanvati, additional solicitor general Harin Raval said he had been made a "scapegoat" for informing the court that the March 8 CBI status report had not been shared with the political executive even though it was the attorney general who gave that statement to the court first. </p> <p align="justify"> Raval said after the highest law officer had given a statement to the court on March 12 that the probe status report was not shown to the government, he had no option but to "embarrassingly" stick to the same argument. </p> <p align="justify"> He told Vahanvati that the latter too was present in the meeting at the law minister's office where the alleged vetting of the coal scam investigation status report took place prior to its filing in the Supreme Court. The ASG alleged that despite having full knowledge of the probe status report, the AG decided to tell the court on March 12 that he had no knowledge of it. </p> <p align="justify"> The letter, with a copy marked to beleaguered law minister Ashwani Kumar, stunned the AG. When contacted by TOI for his response, Vahanvati said, "I am extremely upset to receive it a day before the hearing in the Supreme Court. It is very unfortunate. I never informed the court that it was not shared with the political executive. When the court asked whether I had a copy of the report, I said no. I still do not have a copy of it and we responded to the CBI's allegation on the basis of the court informing that the agency prima facie found that there was no basis or rationale behind the coal block allocations." </p> <p align="justify"> The public display of differences came on a day when government, feeling the pressure of opposition's protest against interference with CBI's investigation, swiftly moved to bring forward the date for the passage of the budget in Lok Sabha to Tuesday to guard against the possibility of a major mishap. The budget was set to be passed over two days beginning May 6. Sources attributed the sudden switch of dates to "caution" on the part of parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath to ensure that the finance bill was not stuck in case Parliament had to be adjourned abruptly. </p> <p align="justify"> The public feuding between the law officers erupted when the government was bracing for the crucial SC hearing on Tuesday on whether law minister Ashwani Kumar, the PMO and the coal ministry sought to subvert CBI's investigation into 'Coalgate'. </p> <p align="justify"> The hearing before a bench led by Justice R M Lodha and comprising Justices Madan Lokur and Kurien Joseph, will essentially look into whether the "vetting" of the status report by the law minister amounted to interfering with CBI's probe and, therefore, an act of impropriety. UPA sources agreed that an adverse determination against the law minister may lead the Congress leadership with little option than to secure Ashwani's papers. </p> <p align="justify"> Contrary to reports in media, the CBI has not submitted to the court that the changes were carried out at the law minister's instance. </p> <p align="justify"> Sources said CBI counsel U U Lalit will present to the court the draft of the status report that the CBI took to the law ministry on March 6, so that Justice Lodha and his brother justices can compare it to the version that was submitted to them on March 8. "We may have to let go of the law minister if the two drafts look significantly different and the contrast leads the court to conclude that Ashwani's intervention was not minor and went beyond proof reading," said a senior UPA functionary. </p> <p align="justify"> As against this, the PMO and coal ministry, which appeared to have taken a peep into the contents of the status report but stopped short of suggesting amendments, are in safer zone. </p> <p align="justify"> Although governments have rarely been comfortable with judiciary taking charge of a politically significant investigation, UPA leadership on Monday seemed resigned to having to swallow the not-so-sweet pill in order to get out of the tricky situation it was pushed into on Friday when the CBI confirmed to the court that it was made to share the contents of the report with the law minister, as well as the PMO and the coal ministry. </p> <p align="justify"> "We can live with an SIT looking into the case and reporting to the SC," said a senior UPA source on Monday when the opposition kept up the pressure for the law minister's resignation for interfering with the CBI probe, virtually eliminating the prospect of the rest of the budget session accomplishing anything significant besides the passage of the bill. </p> <p align="justify"> On March 12, the court had asked the AG whether he had seen the report and whether he had a copy of it. Vahanvati had said that he did not have a copy of the status report. After that, the court asked Raval whether all the status reports were vetted by the CBI director. After Raval replied in the affirmative, the bench asked, "Are you sharing the information given in the status report with the political executive?" </p> <p align="justify"> Raval said, "No. It is a classified document meant only for the court." At this, the court had asked the CBI director to file an affidavit to the effect that the status report was vetted by him and was not shared with the political executive. But the director in his two-page affidavit said it was not only shared with law minister but also with PMO and coal ministry officials. </p> <p align="justify"> When the matter is taken up for hearing on Tuesday in the backdrop of the controversy, the bench could consider options of taking over monitoring of the probe into the coal block allocation scam or even appoint a special investigation team to either supervise the CBI's probe. </p> <p align="justify"> The CBI too intends to file documents to show what portions of its probe status report were changed by the "political executive" before its filing in the Supreme Court on March 8. All together the developments in the last two weeks promise an exciting hearing in the SC on Tuesday. </p>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Times of India, 30 April, 2013, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Vetting-of-coal-report-Top-govt-law-officers-indulge-in-blame-game-ahead-of-SC-hearing/articleshow/19792152.cms', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'vetting-of-coal-report-top-govt-law-officers-indulge-in-blame-game-ahead-of-sc-hearing-dhananjay-mahapatra-20796', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 20796, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ [maximum depth reached] ], '[dirty]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[original]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[virtual]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[invalid]' => [[maximum depth reached]], '[repository]' => 'Articles' }, 'articleid' => (int) 20652, 'metaTitle' => 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Vetting of coal report: Top govt law officers indulge in blame game ahead of SC hearing -Dhananjay Mahapatra', 'metaKeywords' => 'coal mines,Mining,Corruption,Governance,transparency', 'metaDesc' => ' -The Times of India Less than 24 hours before the Supreme Court takes up the coal scam hearing on Tuesday, a blame game broke out within the government over who was responsible for incorrectly telling the court that the CBI had...', 'disp' => '<div align="justify">-The Times of India</div><p align="justify"><br />Less than 24 hours before the Supreme Court takes up the coal scam hearing on Tuesday, a blame game broke out within the government over who was responsible for incorrectly telling the court that the CBI had not shared the contents of its status report on " Coalgate" with the political executive.</p><p align="justify">In a four-page letter to attorney general Goolam Vahanvati, additional solicitor general Harin Raval said he had been made a "scapegoat" for informing the court that the March 8 CBI status report had not been shared with the political executive even though it was the attorney general who gave that statement to the court first.</p><p align="justify">Raval said after the highest law officer had given a statement to the court on March 12 that the probe status report was not shown to the government, he had no option but to "embarrassingly" stick to the same argument.</p><p align="justify">He told Vahanvati that the latter too was present in the meeting at the law minister's office where the alleged vetting of the coal scam investigation status report took place prior to its filing in the Supreme Court. The ASG alleged that despite having full knowledge of the probe status report, the AG decided to tell the court on March 12 that he had no knowledge of it.</p><p align="justify">The letter, with a copy marked to beleaguered law minister Ashwani Kumar, stunned the AG. When contacted by TOI for his response, Vahanvati said, "I am extremely upset to receive it a day before the hearing in the Supreme Court. It is very unfortunate. I never informed the court that it was not shared with the political executive. When the court asked whether I had a copy of the report, I said no. I still do not have a copy of it and we responded to the CBI's allegation on the basis of the court informing that the agency prima facie found that there was no basis or rationale behind the coal block allocations."</p><p align="justify">The public display of differences came on a day when government, feeling the pressure of opposition's protest against interference with CBI's investigation, swiftly moved to bring forward the date for the passage of the budget in Lok Sabha to Tuesday to guard against the possibility of a major mishap. The budget was set to be passed over two days beginning May 6. Sources attributed the sudden switch of dates to "caution" on the part of parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath to ensure that the finance bill was not stuck in case Parliament had to be adjourned abruptly.</p><p align="justify">The public feuding between the law officers erupted when the government was bracing for the crucial SC hearing on Tuesday on whether law minister Ashwani Kumar, the PMO and the coal ministry sought to subvert CBI's investigation into 'Coalgate'.</p><p align="justify">The hearing before a bench led by Justice R M Lodha and comprising Justices Madan Lokur and Kurien Joseph, will essentially look into whether the "vetting" of the status report by the law minister amounted to interfering with CBI's probe and, therefore, an act of impropriety. UPA sources agreed that an adverse determination against the law minister may lead the Congress leadership with little option than to secure Ashwani's papers.</p><p align="justify">Contrary to reports in media, the CBI has not submitted to the court that the changes were carried out at the law minister's instance.</p><p align="justify">Sources said CBI counsel U U Lalit will present to the court the draft of the status report that the CBI took to the law ministry on March 6, so that Justice Lodha and his brother justices can compare it to the version that was submitted to them on March 8. "We may have to let go of the law minister if the two drafts look significantly different and the contrast leads the court to conclude that Ashwani's intervention was not minor and went beyond proof reading," said a senior UPA functionary.</p><p align="justify">As against this, the PMO and coal ministry, which appeared to have taken a peep into the contents of the status report but stopped short of suggesting amendments, are in safer zone.</p><p align="justify">Although governments have rarely been comfortable with judiciary taking charge of a politically significant investigation, UPA leadership on Monday seemed resigned to having to swallow the not-so-sweet pill in order to get out of the tricky situation it was pushed into on Friday when the CBI confirmed to the court that it was made to share the contents of the report with the law minister, as well as the PMO and the coal ministry.</p><p align="justify">"We can live with an SIT looking into the case and reporting to the SC," said a senior UPA source on Monday when the opposition kept up the pressure for the law minister's resignation for interfering with the CBI probe, virtually eliminating the prospect of the rest of the budget session accomplishing anything significant besides the passage of the bill.</p><p align="justify">On March 12, the court had asked the AG whether he had seen the report and whether he had a copy of it. Vahanvati had said that he did not have a copy of the status report. After that, the court asked Raval whether all the status reports were vetted by the CBI director. After Raval replied in the affirmative, the bench asked, "Are you sharing the information given in the status report with the political executive?"</p><p align="justify">Raval said, "No. It is a classified document meant only for the court." At this, the court had asked the CBI director to file an affidavit to the effect that the status report was vetted by him and was not shared with the political executive. But the director in his two-page affidavit said it was not only shared with law minister but also with PMO and coal ministry officials.</p><p align="justify">When the matter is taken up for hearing on Tuesday in the backdrop of the controversy, the bench could consider options of taking over monitoring of the probe into the coal block allocation scam or even appoint a special investigation team to either supervise the CBI's probe.</p><p align="justify">The CBI too intends to file documents to show what portions of its probe status report were changed by the "political executive" before its filing in the Supreme Court on March 8. All together the developments in the last two weeks promise an exciting hearing in the SC on Tuesday.</p>', 'lang' => 'English', 'SITE_URL' => 'https://im4change.in/', 'site_title' => 'im4change', 'adminprix' => 'admin' ] $article_current = object(App\Model\Entity\Article) { 'id' => (int) 20652, 'title' => 'Vetting of coal report: Top govt law officers indulge in blame game ahead of SC hearing -Dhananjay Mahapatra', 'subheading' => '', 'description' => '<div align="justify"> -The Times of India </div> <p align="justify"> <br /> Less than 24 hours before the Supreme Court takes up the coal scam hearing on Tuesday, a blame game broke out within the government over who was responsible for incorrectly telling the court that the CBI had not shared the contents of its status report on " Coalgate" with the political executive. </p> <p align="justify"> In a four-page letter to attorney general Goolam Vahanvati, additional solicitor general Harin Raval said he had been made a "scapegoat" for informing the court that the March 8 CBI status report had not been shared with the political executive even though it was the attorney general who gave that statement to the court first. </p> <p align="justify"> Raval said after the highest law officer had given a statement to the court on March 12 that the probe status report was not shown to the government, he had no option but to "embarrassingly" stick to the same argument. </p> <p align="justify"> He told Vahanvati that the latter too was present in the meeting at the law minister's office where the alleged vetting of the coal scam investigation status report took place prior to its filing in the Supreme Court. The ASG alleged that despite having full knowledge of the probe status report, the AG decided to tell the court on March 12 that he had no knowledge of it. </p> <p align="justify"> The letter, with a copy marked to beleaguered law minister Ashwani Kumar, stunned the AG. When contacted by TOI for his response, Vahanvati said, "I am extremely upset to receive it a day before the hearing in the Supreme Court. It is very unfortunate. I never informed the court that it was not shared with the political executive. When the court asked whether I had a copy of the report, I said no. I still do not have a copy of it and we responded to the CBI's allegation on the basis of the court informing that the agency prima facie found that there was no basis or rationale behind the coal block allocations." </p> <p align="justify"> The public display of differences came on a day when government, feeling the pressure of opposition's protest against interference with CBI's investigation, swiftly moved to bring forward the date for the passage of the budget in Lok Sabha to Tuesday to guard against the possibility of a major mishap. The budget was set to be passed over two days beginning May 6. Sources attributed the sudden switch of dates to "caution" on the part of parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath to ensure that the finance bill was not stuck in case Parliament had to be adjourned abruptly. </p> <p align="justify"> The public feuding between the law officers erupted when the government was bracing for the crucial SC hearing on Tuesday on whether law minister Ashwani Kumar, the PMO and the coal ministry sought to subvert CBI's investigation into 'Coalgate'. </p> <p align="justify"> The hearing before a bench led by Justice R M Lodha and comprising Justices Madan Lokur and Kurien Joseph, will essentially look into whether the "vetting" of the status report by the law minister amounted to interfering with CBI's probe and, therefore, an act of impropriety. UPA sources agreed that an adverse determination against the law minister may lead the Congress leadership with little option than to secure Ashwani's papers. </p> <p align="justify"> Contrary to reports in media, the CBI has not submitted to the court that the changes were carried out at the law minister's instance. </p> <p align="justify"> Sources said CBI counsel U U Lalit will present to the court the draft of the status report that the CBI took to the law ministry on March 6, so that Justice Lodha and his brother justices can compare it to the version that was submitted to them on March 8. "We may have to let go of the law minister if the two drafts look significantly different and the contrast leads the court to conclude that Ashwani's intervention was not minor and went beyond proof reading," said a senior UPA functionary. </p> <p align="justify"> As against this, the PMO and coal ministry, which appeared to have taken a peep into the contents of the status report but stopped short of suggesting amendments, are in safer zone. </p> <p align="justify"> Although governments have rarely been comfortable with judiciary taking charge of a politically significant investigation, UPA leadership on Monday seemed resigned to having to swallow the not-so-sweet pill in order to get out of the tricky situation it was pushed into on Friday when the CBI confirmed to the court that it was made to share the contents of the report with the law minister, as well as the PMO and the coal ministry. </p> <p align="justify"> "We can live with an SIT looking into the case and reporting to the SC," said a senior UPA source on Monday when the opposition kept up the pressure for the law minister's resignation for interfering with the CBI probe, virtually eliminating the prospect of the rest of the budget session accomplishing anything significant besides the passage of the bill. </p> <p align="justify"> On March 12, the court had asked the AG whether he had seen the report and whether he had a copy of it. Vahanvati had said that he did not have a copy of the status report. After that, the court asked Raval whether all the status reports were vetted by the CBI director. After Raval replied in the affirmative, the bench asked, "Are you sharing the information given in the status report with the political executive?" </p> <p align="justify"> Raval said, "No. It is a classified document meant only for the court." At this, the court had asked the CBI director to file an affidavit to the effect that the status report was vetted by him and was not shared with the political executive. But the director in his two-page affidavit said it was not only shared with law minister but also with PMO and coal ministry officials. </p> <p align="justify"> When the matter is taken up for hearing on Tuesday in the backdrop of the controversy, the bench could consider options of taking over monitoring of the probe into the coal block allocation scam or even appoint a special investigation team to either supervise the CBI's probe. </p> <p align="justify"> The CBI too intends to file documents to show what portions of its probe status report were changed by the "political executive" before its filing in the Supreme Court on March 8. All together the developments in the last two weeks promise an exciting hearing in the SC on Tuesday. </p>', 'credit_writer' => 'The Times of India, 30 April, 2013, http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Vetting-of-coal-report-Top-govt-law-officers-indulge-in-blame-game-ahead-of-SC-hearing/articleshow/19792152.cms', 'article_img' => '', 'article_img_thumb' => '', 'status' => (int) 1, 'show_on_home' => (int) 1, 'lang' => 'EN', 'category_id' => (int) 16, 'tag_keyword' => '', 'seo_url' => 'vetting-of-coal-report-top-govt-law-officers-indulge-in-blame-game-ahead-of-sc-hearing-dhananjay-mahapatra-20796', 'meta_title' => null, 'meta_keywords' => null, 'meta_description' => null, 'noindex' => (int) 0, 'publish_date' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenDate) {}, 'most_visit_section_id' => null, 'article_big_img' => null, 'liveid' => (int) 20796, 'created' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'modified' => object(Cake\I18n\FrozenTime) {}, 'edate' => '', 'tags' => [ (int) 0 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 1 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 2 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 3 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {}, (int) 4 => object(Cake\ORM\Entity) {} ], 'category' => object(App\Model\Entity\Category) {}, '[new]' => false, '[accessible]' => [ '*' => true, 'id' => false ], '[dirty]' => [], '[original]' => [], '[virtual]' => [], '[hasErrors]' => false, '[errors]' => [], '[invalid]' => [], '[repository]' => 'Articles' } $articleid = (int) 20652 $metaTitle = 'LATEST NEWS UPDATES | Vetting of coal report: Top govt law officers indulge in blame game ahead of SC hearing -Dhananjay Mahapatra' $metaKeywords = 'coal mines,Mining,Corruption,Governance,transparency' $metaDesc = ' -The Times of India Less than 24 hours before the Supreme Court takes up the coal scam hearing on Tuesday, a blame game broke out within the government over who was responsible for incorrectly telling the court that the CBI had...' $disp = '<div align="justify">-The Times of India</div><p align="justify"><br />Less than 24 hours before the Supreme Court takes up the coal scam hearing on Tuesday, a blame game broke out within the government over who was responsible for incorrectly telling the court that the CBI had not shared the contents of its status report on " Coalgate" with the political executive.</p><p align="justify">In a four-page letter to attorney general Goolam Vahanvati, additional solicitor general Harin Raval said he had been made a "scapegoat" for informing the court that the March 8 CBI status report had not been shared with the political executive even though it was the attorney general who gave that statement to the court first.</p><p align="justify">Raval said after the highest law officer had given a statement to the court on March 12 that the probe status report was not shown to the government, he had no option but to "embarrassingly" stick to the same argument.</p><p align="justify">He told Vahanvati that the latter too was present in the meeting at the law minister's office where the alleged vetting of the coal scam investigation status report took place prior to its filing in the Supreme Court. The ASG alleged that despite having full knowledge of the probe status report, the AG decided to tell the court on March 12 that he had no knowledge of it.</p><p align="justify">The letter, with a copy marked to beleaguered law minister Ashwani Kumar, stunned the AG. When contacted by TOI for his response, Vahanvati said, "I am extremely upset to receive it a day before the hearing in the Supreme Court. It is very unfortunate. I never informed the court that it was not shared with the political executive. When the court asked whether I had a copy of the report, I said no. I still do not have a copy of it and we responded to the CBI's allegation on the basis of the court informing that the agency prima facie found that there was no basis or rationale behind the coal block allocations."</p><p align="justify">The public display of differences came on a day when government, feeling the pressure of opposition's protest against interference with CBI's investigation, swiftly moved to bring forward the date for the passage of the budget in Lok Sabha to Tuesday to guard against the possibility of a major mishap. The budget was set to be passed over two days beginning May 6. Sources attributed the sudden switch of dates to "caution" on the part of parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath to ensure that the finance bill was not stuck in case Parliament had to be adjourned abruptly.</p><p align="justify">The public feuding between the law officers erupted when the government was bracing for the crucial SC hearing on Tuesday on whether law minister Ashwani Kumar, the PMO and the coal ministry sought to subvert CBI's investigation into 'Coalgate'.</p><p align="justify">The hearing before a bench led by Justice R M Lodha and comprising Justices Madan Lokur and Kurien Joseph, will essentially look into whether the "vetting" of the status report by the law minister amounted to interfering with CBI's probe and, therefore, an act of impropriety. UPA sources agreed that an adverse determination against the law minister may lead the Congress leadership with little option than to secure Ashwani's papers.</p><p align="justify">Contrary to reports in media, the CBI has not submitted to the court that the changes were carried out at the law minister's instance.</p><p align="justify">Sources said CBI counsel U U Lalit will present to the court the draft of the status report that the CBI took to the law ministry on March 6, so that Justice Lodha and his brother justices can compare it to the version that was submitted to them on March 8. "We may have to let go of the law minister if the two drafts look significantly different and the contrast leads the court to conclude that Ashwani's intervention was not minor and went beyond proof reading," said a senior UPA functionary.</p><p align="justify">As against this, the PMO and coal ministry, which appeared to have taken a peep into the contents of the status report but stopped short of suggesting amendments, are in safer zone.</p><p align="justify">Although governments have rarely been comfortable with judiciary taking charge of a politically significant investigation, UPA leadership on Monday seemed resigned to having to swallow the not-so-sweet pill in order to get out of the tricky situation it was pushed into on Friday when the CBI confirmed to the court that it was made to share the contents of the report with the law minister, as well as the PMO and the coal ministry.</p><p align="justify">"We can live with an SIT looking into the case and reporting to the SC," said a senior UPA source on Monday when the opposition kept up the pressure for the law minister's resignation for interfering with the CBI probe, virtually eliminating the prospect of the rest of the budget session accomplishing anything significant besides the passage of the bill.</p><p align="justify">On March 12, the court had asked the AG whether he had seen the report and whether he had a copy of it. Vahanvati had said that he did not have a copy of the status report. After that, the court asked Raval whether all the status reports were vetted by the CBI director. After Raval replied in the affirmative, the bench asked, "Are you sharing the information given in the status report with the political executive?"</p><p align="justify">Raval said, "No. It is a classified document meant only for the court." At this, the court had asked the CBI director to file an affidavit to the effect that the status report was vetted by him and was not shared with the political executive. But the director in his two-page affidavit said it was not only shared with law minister but also with PMO and coal ministry officials.</p><p align="justify">When the matter is taken up for hearing on Tuesday in the backdrop of the controversy, the bench could consider options of taking over monitoring of the probe into the coal block allocation scam or even appoint a special investigation team to either supervise the CBI's probe.</p><p align="justify">The CBI too intends to file documents to show what portions of its probe status report were changed by the "political executive" before its filing in the Supreme Court on March 8. All together the developments in the last two weeks promise an exciting hearing in the SC on Tuesday.</p>' $lang = 'English' $SITE_URL = 'https://im4change.in/' $site_title = 'im4change' $adminprix = 'admin'
include - APP/Template/Layout/printlayout.ctp, line 8 Cake\View\View::_evaluate() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1413 Cake\View\View::_render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 1374 Cake\View\View::renderLayout() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 927 Cake\View\View::render() - CORE/src/View/View.php, line 885 Cake\Controller\Controller::render() - CORE/src/Controller/Controller.php, line 791 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::_invoke() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 126 Cake\Http\ActionDispatcher::dispatch() - CORE/src/Http/ActionDispatcher.php, line 94 Cake\Http\BaseApplication::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/BaseApplication.php, line 235 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\RoutingMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/RoutingMiddleware.php, line 162 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Routing\Middleware\AssetMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Routing/Middleware/AssetMiddleware.php, line 88 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Error\Middleware\ErrorHandlerMiddleware::__invoke() - CORE/src/Error/Middleware/ErrorHandlerMiddleware.php, line 96 Cake\Http\Runner::__invoke() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 65 Cake\Http\Runner::run() - CORE/src/Http/Runner.php, line 51
![]() |
Vetting of coal report: Top govt law officers indulge in blame game ahead of SC hearing -Dhananjay Mahapatra |
-The Times of India
In a four-page letter to attorney general Goolam Vahanvati, additional solicitor general Harin Raval said he had been made a "scapegoat" for informing the court that the March 8 CBI status report had not been shared with the political executive even though it was the attorney general who gave that statement to the court first. Raval said after the highest law officer had given a statement to the court on March 12 that the probe status report was not shown to the government, he had no option but to "embarrassingly" stick to the same argument. He told Vahanvati that the latter too was present in the meeting at the law minister's office where the alleged vetting of the coal scam investigation status report took place prior to its filing in the Supreme Court. The ASG alleged that despite having full knowledge of the probe status report, the AG decided to tell the court on March 12 that he had no knowledge of it. The letter, with a copy marked to beleaguered law minister Ashwani Kumar, stunned the AG. When contacted by TOI for his response, Vahanvati said, "I am extremely upset to receive it a day before the hearing in the Supreme Court. It is very unfortunate. I never informed the court that it was not shared with the political executive. When the court asked whether I had a copy of the report, I said no. I still do not have a copy of it and we responded to the CBI's allegation on the basis of the court informing that the agency prima facie found that there was no basis or rationale behind the coal block allocations." The public display of differences came on a day when government, feeling the pressure of opposition's protest against interference with CBI's investigation, swiftly moved to bring forward the date for the passage of the budget in Lok Sabha to Tuesday to guard against the possibility of a major mishap. The budget was set to be passed over two days beginning May 6. Sources attributed the sudden switch of dates to "caution" on the part of parliamentary affairs minister Kamal Nath to ensure that the finance bill was not stuck in case Parliament had to be adjourned abruptly. The public feuding between the law officers erupted when the government was bracing for the crucial SC hearing on Tuesday on whether law minister Ashwani Kumar, the PMO and the coal ministry sought to subvert CBI's investigation into 'Coalgate'. The hearing before a bench led by Justice R M Lodha and comprising Justices Madan Lokur and Kurien Joseph, will essentially look into whether the "vetting" of the status report by the law minister amounted to interfering with CBI's probe and, therefore, an act of impropriety. UPA sources agreed that an adverse determination against the law minister may lead the Congress leadership with little option than to secure Ashwani's papers. Contrary to reports in media, the CBI has not submitted to the court that the changes were carried out at the law minister's instance. Sources said CBI counsel U U Lalit will present to the court the draft of the status report that the CBI took to the law ministry on March 6, so that Justice Lodha and his brother justices can compare it to the version that was submitted to them on March 8. "We may have to let go of the law minister if the two drafts look significantly different and the contrast leads the court to conclude that Ashwani's intervention was not minor and went beyond proof reading," said a senior UPA functionary. As against this, the PMO and coal ministry, which appeared to have taken a peep into the contents of the status report but stopped short of suggesting amendments, are in safer zone. Although governments have rarely been comfortable with judiciary taking charge of a politically significant investigation, UPA leadership on Monday seemed resigned to having to swallow the not-so-sweet pill in order to get out of the tricky situation it was pushed into on Friday when the CBI confirmed to the court that it was made to share the contents of the report with the law minister, as well as the PMO and the coal ministry. "We can live with an SIT looking into the case and reporting to the SC," said a senior UPA source on Monday when the opposition kept up the pressure for the law minister's resignation for interfering with the CBI probe, virtually eliminating the prospect of the rest of the budget session accomplishing anything significant besides the passage of the bill. On March 12, the court had asked the AG whether he had seen the report and whether he had a copy of it. Vahanvati had said that he did not have a copy of the status report. After that, the court asked Raval whether all the status reports were vetted by the CBI director. After Raval replied in the affirmative, the bench asked, "Are you sharing the information given in the status report with the political executive?" Raval said, "No. It is a classified document meant only for the court." At this, the court had asked the CBI director to file an affidavit to the effect that the status report was vetted by him and was not shared with the political executive. But the director in his two-page affidavit said it was not only shared with law minister but also with PMO and coal ministry officials. When the matter is taken up for hearing on Tuesday in the backdrop of the controversy, the bench could consider options of taking over monitoring of the probe into the coal block allocation scam or even appoint a special investigation team to either supervise the CBI's probe. The CBI too intends to file documents to show what portions of its probe status report were changed by the "political executive" before its filing in the Supreme Court on March 8. All together the developments in the last two weeks promise an exciting hearing in the SC on Tuesday. |