The author, in the garb of asking Gadkari to be ready for deep probes has criticised all the others whereas it would have been proper for him, considering his vituperative against the non-BJP players and especially the Royal Family cohorts/servers, to analyse the deep rooted coruption in Gadkaris parent organisations like rge RSS and BJP first. All our politicians may be criminals--but that does NOT justify the author to raise the Gadkari issue merely to expose the non-BJP elements in our thoroughly corrupt and immoral polity and bureaucracy. If a Shah Commission-like entity is constituted merely to investigate the role of the NDA PM's household in collaboration with almost all the Secretaries and re-employed IAS-IPS officer appointed as special representatives for certain specific jobs and how transfers and postings in the Revenue departments, Police,and Enforcemrnt agencies were done, the revealations will be more shameful and filthy than what Shah Commission or Maruti Commission found. In fact, those reports would become "first book"-like materials in comparison with the misdeeds during the NDA (and the Janata) rules!I wold have been more honourable for this brilliant author with a powerful pen to shed his party allegiance and dissect the Gadkari affair with his CA background. It is hoped that he will make an attempt at a dispassionate dissection of the Gadkari filth. Vadras and Rahuls will stay, nobody should bother as this is all Home Turf for the decent "
If there was Sanjay Gandhi during Emergency, then there rose Ranjan Bhattacharya in the PM's household in NDA-I to resume again in the later shorter period of NDA-II! To talk of "probity"only to corner and criticise and attack the Royal Family and the Queen and the Crown Prince thus becomes totally unjustified without first accepting Ranjan's role and the role played by the then Secretaries to the GoI and NSA and now by kicking out the National President of the Party. Is it not embarassing that a Congress leader hobnobs in the BCCI with a leading BJP spokesman-leader still despite the hate campaign by the party against Sanjay then the ruling Royal Family and its eqivalent of Rajnan? [One can't help noticing that the foster son-in-law's name and the real son-in-law's names both begin with "R"!.]So, it is not Gadkari who deserves a thorough and fast track investigation, but the BJP must do some introspection before it is destroyed in the ensuing general Elections which may come well before 2014. The standards of probity must not be different for Sonia and her family and the the BJP. The bogus addresses of directors of Gadkari's companies clearly indicate and prove the existence of dishonest and ulterior motives to defraud the country's revenues and hence unlawful intent which cannot be washed away by any amount of criticism by anyone of Rahul Gandhi against whom THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF SUCH UNLAWFUL INTENT. Yes, it is BJP which must explain Gadkari's conduct
Before I begin the 2nd parcel of comments on this brilliant piece, I must take the liberty of reminding this young author that, the present BJP was the main constituent of the first ever non-Congress Govt. in 1977-80 and the party never recalled itys experience of that period of a shortlived reprieve from a tyrannical rule, though it dis come to power in its later Avatar as NDA-1 and NDA-2 for short intervals and behaved in the same manner as the ruling party--which surely is going to remain for ever in total control of India through the Royals--and Gadkaris are only the products of the same corrupt national trait of India. Just for example-if BJP-NDA were so concerned about probity in public life, there would have been no RANJANs and the Shah Commission's report (proscribed in 1980 after the return of the Congress rule) would have been resurrected, along with the Maruti report of Justice AC Gupta Commission immediately after the NDA-I assumed power and would have reiterated the instructions issued during the Janata Rule inter alia reg. bureaucracy to the effect the NO SUPERIOR OFFICER's or MINISTER's VERBAL ORDERS WERE TO BE FOLLOWED AND IT WAS INCUMBENT ON ALL SUPERIORS TO ISSUE ORDERS ONLY IN WRITING. The NDA govts behaved exactly in the same--and rather, more reprehensible--Congress-lke manner as regards corrupt practices and killing all remnants of probity in public life.
As regards the fact that, "the charges against Gadkari are three-fold -- one that addresses of some directors in which Gadkari has financial interests are fake, second that the directors themselves are fictitious and finally there is a money-laundering angle. Believe me, all these charges are grave", it must be appreciated by the CA author that these are the basic, age-old practices adopted for decades by the business community, especially originating in the then Calcutta-based jute magnates and later even by a newspaper magnate-practices with which the novice ITOs are well acquainted with and this aspect is the first of the few fundamental points inquired by them. It is indeed strange that the former PWD minister of Maharashtra, the National PRESIDENT of the BJP and a businessman per se should adopt such crude methods to introduce unaccounted money or benamis as fronts. One wonders at the level of his IT advisers, obviously some top men in the profession and, no doubt, assisted by some extremely adept IT men whose antecedents may be worth investigating. And, as regards the author's concern about "standards of probity in public life", he must be too young to know that, probity in public/political life in India was put into ICCU on the date of the declaration of Emergency in 1975 and died when the a particular family took total control of India's political future, duly assisted by the corrupt Janata and later the NDA regimes. [Ref.Shah & Maruti Com rep
Also to point out there has been unsecured loans in the cases of Vadra and Gadkari. Nitin gadkari told this is because of political good will. It can be a case, that business men promoted this PURTI by channelizing the black money through the alleged shell companies. But I see a slim chance for putting up a strong case against Gadkari. Nevertheless, the company as claimed by Gadkari is a success story in Vidharbha and if its true he should be given credit for raising money to enable such an enterprise in the suicide zone. Lastly, all these are allegations only. It will be also interesting to get some data on the effect of purti on farmers lives in Vidharbha from some agricultural reports, etc.
