Congress demand answers on Jay Shah’s growth extraordinaire

All India Congress committee (AICC) spokesperson and Kaithal MLA Randeep Singh Surjevala on Tuesday demanded answers from prime minister Narendra Modi over the "extraordinary growth" of Jay Shah, son of the PM's friend and BJP national president Amit Shah during his tenure.

Surjeevala also demanded an investigation into the entire issue, and asked for Shah to step down from his post as the BJP national president till such time his name has been cleared from being involved in the 16,000 times jump in Temple Enterprises private limited owned by his son, wife and daughter-in-law in 2014-15.

"PM Modi came to power by citing that he will neither "eat or let anyone eat", meaning not indulge in corruption or let any of his relatives, their sons and daughters, friends, their wives or sons indulge in corruption. Now, his friend's wife, son and daughter-in-law have been found to have begotten money from unclear sources of funds. Will Modi indulge in an investigation and ask Shah to resign or remove him in order to ensure a free and fair investigation?" retorted Surjeevala.

Surjeevala further added fuel to the fire by citing that the union government gave special permission to additional solicitor general Tushar Mehta to defen Jay Shah, thereby questioning whether the premission was accorded by the union law minister in violation of rule 8 and 10 of the law officers (conditions of services) riles of 1987.

"It is questionable whether it is appropriate for the highest law offices of the government of India to appear to defend a private person when the accusation is a clear violation of the law and demand for an investigation in this conduct," he said.

Surjeevala also questioned the timing of union cabinet minister Piyush Goel holding a urgent press conference to defend Jay Shah when he was the power minister at the time of extension of "special loan" to the company of Shah's family.

"The simple question is why is a union cabinet minister defending a private person of his business dealings? Whether Jay Shah is a member of the union cabinet or a national office bearer of the BJP? If not, why is government of India falling over backwards to defend the business of a private person?" asked Surjeevala.

The AICC spokesperson has also said the government will be launching agitations within the Parliament and outside in this issue, until the time Shah steps down and investigations are ordered into the allegations against Shah's family owned company dealings.

In 41 months no evidence against Vadra dealings: AICC

While going on the offensive against Jay Shah and Amit Shah, AICC spokesperson Randeep Singh Surjeevala tried to defend Robert Vadra, son-in-law of AICC president Sonia Gandhi and husband of Priyanka Gandhi, in his alleged illegal land dealings in Harayana.

"In the last 41 months, there has been not been a single shred of evidence with regard to the alleged illegal land dealings either in Harayana or elsewhere. That is all we have to say with regard to Vadra," he said.

Times Now and another English channel banned from Surjeevala Press Con

At the press conference two English media channels including Times Now was banned.

High drama ensued when other television channels and media outlets decried the decision of Surjeevala with pointed attacks citing that he was trying to bring the "Delhi culture" to Karnataka and being "hypocritic" by attacking the BJP over Jay Shah controversey and not taking questions on the Robert Vadra expose.

However, undeterred, and with the silent support to the ban by working president Dinesh Gundu Rao and state president G Parameshwara, the ban continued through the press conference.

Surjeevala tried to defend his bizarre decision of banning the two television channels by citing that the media outlets were acting as "agents" of the union government and BJP.

"Thali ek haath se nahi bajthi (you cannot clap with one hand). While we respect the emotions of our media friends with whom we have a relationship beyond politics and journalism, the two media channels are behaving with a pre-meditated intent of attacking a political party and acting as "agents" of the government (union)," he commented.