Site icon Youth Ki Awaaz

“Modi Sarkar Chor Hai’ Vs ‘Rahul Gandhi Maafi Maango’: How To Waste A Day In Parliament

The ongoing battle between the ruling party BJP and opposition parties led by Congress over the Rafale deal intensified in the Parliament on December 18. Proceedings of day six of the Parliament’s winter session were adjourned as BJP and Congress lawmakers locked horns over the recent SC verdict on the Rafale deal.

BJP MPs demanded Rahul Gandhi to apologise and subsequently resign from his post over his remarks on Rafale deal and PM Narendra Modi. The parliament was in an uproar with BJP MPs raising slogans like ‘Rahul Gandhi maafi maango’ ( Rahul Gandhi apologise) and ‘Gandhi parivar chor hai’ (Gandhi family is a thief). Countering the MPs from the ruling party, Congress roared ‘Modi sarkar chor hai’ (Modi govt. is a thief) and accused the government of misleading the apex court on CAG report.

Ever since the Supreme Court’s verdict on Rafale deal came out, BJP and Congress have been launching scathing attacks against each other. While the government pleads innocent and claims that opposition misled the masses over the Rafale fighter jet deal, Congress has accused that government misinformed the SC over the CAG report, on the basis of which the court dismissed the petitions demanding a probe. The issue has become a major bone of contention between the two parties and is affecting the winter session that was supposed to discuss crucial matters like the agrarian crisis. Both PM Narendra Modi and Congress president Rahul Gandhi are facing privileged motion in the House.

Public Accounts Committee chairman and a senior Congress leader Mallikarjun Kharge raised questions over the Para 25 of the SC that stated that the CAG report on the deal “has been examined by the Public Accounts Committee”. Kharge claimed that PAC never discussed the CAG and that it was never tabled in the parliament.

On its part, Centre claimed that it did not mislead the court and that it was a ‘typing error’. The government further said that it has moved an application in the SC seeking the correction in two sentences of para 25 of the judgement.

Exit mobile version