Regulations
Bagrodia seeks parity with Manmohan in coal scam case
Former minister of state for coal Santosh Bagrodia on Monday sought parity with former prime minister Manmohan Singh seeking the stay of the criminal proceedings against him in a coal scam case, contending that his case of not being guilty of any wrongdoing was much more stronger.
 
Reiterating his position taken on September 7, Bagrodia told the bench of Justice M.B. Lokur, Justice Kurian Joseph and Justice A.K. Sikri that he could not be treated differently from the former prime minister, stressing that that he was innocent but his reputation and future was being ruined.
 
Bagrodia was minister of state for coal under Manmohan Singh from April 2008 to May 2009. He was granted bail in the case on September 8.
 
Made an accused in the allocation of Maharashtra's Bander coal block to AMR Iron and Steel Pvt Ltd, he said that he can produced evidence that there were continuous parleys between Kumaramangalam Birla and others including the then prime minister.
 
The apex court on April 1 had stayed the summons against Manmohan Singh issued by a special court in connection with the allocation of 15 percent share in the Talabira II coal block to the Birla-owned Hindalco.
 
Appearing for Bagrodia, senior counsel K.K.Venugopal told the court that his client was innocent but his "reputation and future was being ruined".
 
Noting that there was only one apex court, Venugopal sought the reiteration of order passed by the bench of Justice V. Gopala Gowda and Justice C. Nagappan suspending the summons against Manmohan Singh by the special court.
 
He argued that when there was no dishonest intention, how could his client be arrayed as an accused, noting that nowhere in the trial court order there was a mens rea (criminal intention) alleged against him but still he was being proceeded against. 
 
However, senior counsel A.Sharan took the court through the trial court order demonstrating that there were specific paragraphs imputing criminal intention against Bagrodia.
 
While adjoining the hearing for September 29, the court allowed Bagrodia to move an application before the trial court seeking exemption from appearing before it.
 
Besides Bagrodia, others summoned in the case were ex-Coal Secretary H C Gupta and retired bureaucrat L.S. Janoti. The case involves Rajya Sabha MP Vijay Darda, his son Devendra Darda, AMR Iron and Steel Pvt Ltd and its director Manoj Jayaswal.
 
They have been accused of alleged offences punishable under sections of the Indian Penal Code relating to criminal conspiracy, cheating, criminal breach of trust by public servant and under other provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
 
Disclaimer: Information, facts or opinions expressed in this news article are presented as sourced from IANS and do not reflect views of Moneylife and hence Moneylife is not responsible or liable for the same. As a source and news provider, IANS is responsible for accuracy, completeness, suitability and validity of any information in this article.

User

China injects 50 bn yuan into market
China's central bank pumped 50 billion yuan ($7.85 billion) into the money market via reverse re-purchase agreement (repo) on Tuesday, the first cash injection this week.
 
The yield for the seven-day reverse repo stood at 2.35 percent, Xinhua news agency quoted the Bank of China's (PBOC) statement as saying.
 
Under a reverse repo, the central bank purchases securities from large banks and brokerages with the agreement to sell them in the future as an effective means to tackle short-term money shortages in the market.
 
The cash injection will offset the effects from earlier reverse repo due on Tuesday.
 
Given a stable renminbi (RMB), the money shortage was greatly eased in September and the PBOC's operations were smaller than those in August.
 
Disclaimer: Information, facts or opinions expressed in this news article are presented as sourced from IANS and do not reflect views of Moneylife and hence Moneylife is not responsible or liable for the same. As a source and news provider, IANS is responsible for accuracy, completeness, suitability and validity of any information in this article.

User

How Senate Hopefuls Keep Donors Secret From Voters Until It’s Too Late
US Senate campaign finance disclosures are still slow-walked on paper through a 40-year-old system. Is getting it fixed worth trading away another lid on political money? 
 
For nearly 15 years, voters have been able to click a mouse to view an up-to-date list of who’s contributed to candidates for the presidency and the U.S. House, and how those funds have been spent.
 
But the law still allows Senate candidates to file campaign reports on paper, making it nearly impossible to keep up with the flow of money.
 
Efforts to fix that imbalance have died over and over again in the Senate, regardless of which party controlled the chamber. Whether the latest attempt succeeds before the 2016 election may rest on a political horse trade – one that would loosen the reins on another part of campaign spending.
 
Since December 2000, presidential and House candidates have had to file campaign reports electronically to the Federal Election Commission, meaning the public, journalists and analysts can see donors and recipients within minutes. The language in the 2000 law, though, didn’t cover Senate candidates. 
 
As a result the Senate uses a paper system that hasn’t changed much since 1972: Filings are mailed, faxed or delivered by hand to the Secretary of the Senate. The paperwork, which can involve thousands of pages in a big race, is then passed to the FEC, which pays to have the documents scanned and posted online. The information in the reports is typed into a computer so the data can be published for researchers and journalists. The whole process costs the FEC up to $500,000 a year, the Congressional Budget Office has said.
 
The cumbersome process means information about fundraising and spending isn’t available for days or sometimes more than a week after the reports are due – and then in a format that isn’t easily searchable. In the final weeks before an election, voters may have only a few days to look through hundreds of pages of filings in key races. This isn’t new: a Campaign Finance Institute analysis in 2004 showed that “voters preparing to go to the polls last November did not know where a large amount of money to elect their Senators for the next six years was coming from.”
 
In most cases it’s a matter of delayed information that could be useful to undecided voters, rather than someone trying to hide an improper donation. This pattern has continued in recent elections, although the FEC has reduced the length of time voters would need to wait. For example, the final filing before the November 2014 election was due on Oct. 23. In Colorado, Democratic Sen. Mark Udall was locked in a tight re-election race that he eventually lost to Cory Gardner, a Republican congressman. Udall submitted his campaign filing to the Senate on Oct. 22. But images of the 1,029 pages did not get posted on the FEC site – where the public could examine them – until Oct. 28, six days later, according to the FEC. That filing included maximum contributions from… Continue Reading…
 
Courtesy: ProPublica

User

We are listening!

Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.
  Loading...
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email
Close

To continue


Please
Sign Up or Sign In
with

Email

BUY NOW

The Scam
24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
Moneylife Magazine
Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
Stockletters in 3 Flavours
Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
(Includes Moneylife Magazine and Lion Stockletter)