New Delhi:
Home Minister P Chidambaram, who finds himself the target of a concerted Opposition attack yet again, has said he is "deeply hurt" and has rejected the charge that he misused his office to end a police investigation against SP Gupta, a businessman who was allegedly his client. Or that there was a conflict of interest.
The issue has seen both Houses of Parliament stalled for the last two days as the BJP demands his resignation, citing a newspaper report to make its allegation. SP Gupta had been charged with cheating and forgery in 1999, when Mr Chidambaram allegedly represented him. The BJP has pointed to a Home Ministry letter sent to Delhi Police in May this year asking that the cases against Mr Gupta be withdrawn. The letter said this had the approval of the Home Minister.
Mr Chidambaram has denied he had given any such approval. Talking to reporters today, flanked by former Home Secretary GK Pillai and present Home Secretary RK Singh, the minister said a Home Ministry Director had admitted he had drafted that letter, but had also said that he had not shown it to anyone. "I have seen the file only once," Mr Chidambaram said.
In May this year, Mr Gupta petitioned the Home Ministry for cases against him to be dropped - he was also accused of misusing Sonia and Rajiv Gandhi's names on his letterhead. The Home Minister said today that many such representations to drop Mr Gupta's cases had been received by his ministry since 2004. Some MPs had also reportedly written to the ministry saying that a criminal case had been registered in a civil matter and that the businessman had alleged that he had faced harassment by the police.
In view of the many appeals, Mr Chidambaram said, GK Pillai, who was Home Secretary till earlier this year, had suggested that the Law Ministry be consulted for its opinion. The Home Ministry's legal wing reportedly asked the Law Ministry whether the cases could be reinvestigated. The Law Ministry reportedly advised that there could be no reinvestigation since chargesheets had been filed, but they could be withdrawn if it was so seen fit.
On May 4 this year, the file reached the Home Minister, who emphatically says that he instructed that his Ministry give no opinion to the Delhi government, but merely forward the Law Ministry's opinion for scrutiny and action. Mr Chidambaram confirmed what Union Home Secretary RK Singh had said yesterday: "The Ministry of Law was consulted, and a decision was taken that the petition (asking for cases to be withdrawn) and the Ministry of Law's advice may be forwarded to the Delhi government for appropriate scrutiny and action. The Home Minister wrote only that 'convey advice of Law Ministry'."
It is in this next step, when the Director in the MHA drafted the note to the Delhi administration, that the minister and his ministry say the misrepresentation occurred. The Director sent the letter in May asking the Delhi Police to withdraw the cases against Mr Gupta, saying this had the Home Minister's approval and that the Home Ministry had consulted the Law Ministry.
In September, a committee headed by the Principal Secretary in the Delhi Government's Home Department approved withdrawal of the cases. The Lieutenant Governor gave approval for this on November 18. But now he has asked for investigation to continue, after being advised that there is enough evidence to merit an inquiry.
The minister, in his strong rebuttal of today, said there was no "conflict of interest" that the BJP accuses him of. "What conflict of interests? A lawyer in his career appears in scores of cases. Does he carry interests in all the cases throughout his life? I may have appeared in one or two cases (during the said time)... but I don't have any current subsisting interest with any case." Mr Chidambaram's party, the Congress, was not in government then.
Speaking in the minister's defence, his party spokesperson Manish Tewari said, "There is no conflict of interest. That is what you need to understand very carefully. Mr Chidambaram was not his advocate on record, was not his counsel in the court. He was an arguing counsel. Senior advocate is an arguing counsel who is invariably engaged by the briefing or the instructing counsel or the advocate on record to represent to the court may be because he has better face value or a better understanding of the law. Therefore invariably, in most cases, a senior advocate does not even have a direct interaction."
The government has dismissed the BJP's demand for Mr Chidambaram's resignation. "I don't think this demand is appropriate. They should not insist on it because Home Ministry had already made it clear that he had not given any such instructions. So why should he be brought into controversies unnecessarily? And I don't think that BJP should insist on that demand," Minister of State for Parliamentary Affairs Rajv Shukla said today.
But the BJP continues to insist that there is a "mountain of evidence" against Mr Chidambaram. "Well I can understand my friend Manish Tewari's problem. He has to defend the indefensible but there is I will say a mountain of evidence to show that Mr Chidambaram proactively acted in this manner. It is amazing that the file started moving immediately after the day he became Home Minister .Their first representation to the Home Ministry is received a day after he takes over as Home Minister," said Chandan Mitra of the BJP.