Vadra case: Cong may move court

Aditi Tandon

Tribune News Service

New Delhi, August 31

Conscious of political implications of the findings of Justice SN Dhingra Commission, which submitted its report to the Haryana Government this evening, opposition Congress today hinted at moving court if push came to shove in the coming days.

The party has decided to be in a wait and watch situation until the report is made public and its recommendations officially known.

Questioning the legality of the commission, which examined alleged irregularities in grant of commercial licences for 68 acre land in Gurgaon, including the tract owned by Congress president Sonia Gandhi’s son-in-law Robert Vadra, the Congress today asked how the commission could condemn anyone without even giving them a hearing. The land in question was given to Vadra during the tenure of former Haryana Chief Minister Bhupinder Singh Hooda of the Congress.

Party chief spokesperson of Congress and former Haryana industries minister Randeep Surjewala wondered why the commission set up to probe “purported irregularities” by Vadra and Hooda had not summoned the two even once.

Congress cited past precedents where commissions of inquiry had been scrapped in the past only because they had failed to call witnesses and complainants under Sections 8B and 8C of the Commission of Inquiry Act 1952. The law mandates commissions to give notices to respondents, share copies of petitions with them, allow them to present their case and even cross examine witnesses.

“In this case the commission didn’t summon even one person. They summoned Hooda once but when Hooda sought to know the Sections under which he had been asked to come, the commission wrote back to him saying there no specific complaint against him and that they would present one if it came. So if there is no complaint, what is the Commission probing?” said Surjewala.

The Congress was miffed today with portions of the Commission report being “selectively leaked to the media”. The party said this had been done to deliberately malign the reputation of Mr Vadra and fuel the game of political witch hunt. Surjewala demanded that the report be made public at the earliest while admitting the prerogative to share the report was of Justcie Dhingra or the state government.