Top

Lalit Modi row: BJP line to shield Vasundhara Raje

Raje has shares in son’s firm, says her election affidavit
New Delhi: The BJP, on Friday, came up with a new line to defend Rajasthan Chief Minister Vasundhara Raje, saying that even though she signed the affidavit for former IPL chief Lalit Modi for residency in the UK, Ms Raje did not depose in court.
This new line of defence, sources disclosed, came after Ms Raje met senior BJP leader Saudan Singh who was sent by the Central leadership. Mr Saudan Singh on Friday met the RSS top brass, Bhaiyya Joshi and Krishna Gopal, in Mumbai where he apprised them of the issue and the developments therein.
In a meeting with the BJP spokespersons, the party chief reportedly indicated that they have to “defend Raje-Sushma-Smriti Irani at any cost”.
Preparing for “any eventuality” in Rajasthan, Ms Raje on Friday met her legislators to drum up support. Her office, however, denied speculation that she was organising a signature campaign. However, trouble seems to be mounting against the beleaguered CM after it was disclosed that she was the beneficiary of investment of over '11 crore made by the tainted IPL ex-commissioner in her son’s company at a huge premium.
An affidavit filed by Ms Raje before the Election Commission showed that she had 3,280 shares in Niyant Heritage Hotels, owned by her son Dushyant Singh, an MP. Lalit Modi had invested over Rs 11 crore in this company at a huge premium of over Rs 96,000 per share of Rs 10.
This disclosure generated charges that Ms Raje had benefited from Mr Modi’s controversial investments, which Rajasthan BJP president Ashok Parnami rebutted by claiming these shares had been “gifted” to her by Dushyant Singh and his wife Niharika.
Mr Parnami said Dushyant Singh and his wife had gifted 1,615 and 1,665 shares, respectively, to Ms Raje on her birthday. Referring to the controversial “affidavit” in support of Mr Lalit Modi, he said the signature on it was that of Ms Raje, but it was only a “draft” which was “never” presented before any court or any other legal body in the UK. He said it was written deliberately “so that the ugly face of revenge by the Congress did not come before the international media.
( Source : deccan chronicle )
Next Story