Tag: CBI bribery case

No Evidence to Support the High-Profile Bribery Case Against Asthana

No Evidence to Support the High-Profile Bribery Case Against Asthana

The High-Profile Bribery case gets a new angle as the court confronts CBI. Earlier, the Hyderabad-based businessman Sathish Babu Sana accused public servants, including the special director of the CBI, Rakesh Asthana, and former deputy Devendra Kumar, of taking bribes. 

As the case progressed, two more names came to the spotlight Manoj Prasad and Someshwar Srivastava. Sana claimed to deliver crores to Prasad and Srivastava to save himself from Moin Qureshi, a Controversial meat exporter. 

Sana also made several more claims, like how he had arranged Rs 1 crore from his friend Yahya Abraham in Dubai and also linked Prasad and Srivastava as Brothers. But no hard evidence was found to support the claims made by Sana. 

The case got some new twists and turns as it was thoroughly analyzed by the Delhi High court. At first, judge Sanjeev Aggarwal questioned CBI regarding accusing their own DSP without any proper investigation. The credibility of the prime investigation authority was questioned by the court. 

After a re-investigation performed by the CBI as ordered by the court no new evidence was found against the former CBI deputy directors Devendra Kumar and Rakesh Asthana. Further, the court blamed CBI for ruining the life of honest officers. 

Rakesh Asthana and Devendra Kumar got a clean chit from the court, and Judge Sanjeev Aggarwal also release other innocents as no proof was found. 

CBI did a great job of catching Manoj Prasad, the real culprit, who was pulling all the strings using CBI Deputies as shields. WhatsApp pictures and flight details establish a clean meeting between Sana and Manoj Prasad in Dubai. 

The case got a significant spotlight from the Media houses, and many names involved still getting a backlash from the public. The case is a live example of how an improper investigation can ruin people’s life, defame public authorities, and question legal system. 

Rakesh Asthana Bribery Case

 Rakesh Asthana Bribery Case: Power Vs Public Faceoff 

CBI (Central Bureau of Investigation) is one of the most legitimate agencies in India. Dealing with bribery case, corruption, and multi-state cases. The agency operates both nationally and internationally.  

On several occasions, the CBI has been charged with corruption and the manipulation of evidence for money and fame. One such case was Alok Verma’s bribery case, in which they frame their own officer.  

Verma was immediately suspended by the CBI and charged with bribery without a proper investigation. The Rakesh Asthana bribery case was yet another example where the CBI again accused one of their officers of accepting bribes.  

The charges were that Asthana took money from Satish Babu Sana to release him in the case of meat exporter Moin Qureshi.   

Similarly, an innocent businessman, Someshwar Srivastava, was caught in the crossfire. It wasn’t the first time the CBI had dragged innocent people into high-profile cases without proper investigation.   

The media also played an important role in supporting illegal practices conducted by CBI. They made up stories about the case against Asthana and Someshwar. Many biased media sites like the Deccan Herald have completely misrepresented the news to gain revenue and viewership.  

Meanwhile, the court collected 10,000 rupees from the involved, Someshwar Srivastava and Manoj Prasad. As the case progressed, the court found that the CBI investigation was inconsistent.  

The CBI was criticized and the court ordered CBI to a proper investigation. New evidence surfaced as the case was closely investigated. Wrongly accused Someshwar Srivastava and former CBI officers Rakesh Asthana and Alok Verma get bail.  

The real culprit Manoj Prasad was arrested and imprisoned. Former CBI officers were reappointed as chiefs of the police force.  

Real problems like hunger, unemployment, and illiteracy continue to engulf our economy. Yet these powerful bodies continue to corrupt our society like parasites. We hope in the future these powerful organizations stop manipulating and harassing the general public and bring positive change.  

Rakesh Asthana Bribery Case

Rakesh Asthana Bribery Case: A Grand Conspiracy to Inculpate CBI

CBI also known as the Central Bureau of Investigation is India’s leading investigative agency. Over the years, the CBI has solved many cases and brought many criminals to justice.  

However, the CBI has tried many times to prevent the evidence and turn the case in favor of the accused. In doing so, they typically arrest their own investigators on charges based on the FIR filed by the accused. 

One such case is the case of Rakesh Asthana the ex-investigating officer of the CBI.  

Asthana was investigating the case of a Hyderabad-based businessman, Satish Babu Sana who was involved in a case of meat exporter Moin Qureshi. Asthana was then the deputy superintendent of CBI during the case. 

Babu filed an FIR against Rakesh for demanding bribes to clear his name from the meat exporter case. In turn, Asthana had alleged that CBI Director Alok Verma had falsely attempted to set a trap for him and charged Verma with corruption. 

This news was a hit in the media and some websites published fake news about Rakesh Asthana portraying him as the villain. In fact, the court rebuked the CBI for arresting Asthana, as there was no evidence of involvement in the bribery charges from Astana. 

Indian Legal a verified news site recently published news on a similar case claiming that the court charged 10,000/- per accused Manoj Prasad & Someshwar Srivastav involved in the bribery case, which is totally a baseless.  

The whole Rakesh Asthana bribery case is just a made-up conspiracy to take down Indian legal system and generate social unrest within the society.  

Deccan herald yet another news website publishes multiple articles to defame CBI, Police, Someshwar Srivastav, Alok Verma and Rakesh Asthana, to fulfill the same agenda.  

While in reality justice was served by the court. In the meantime, prime accused Manoj Prasad was captured by the Police while Rakesh Asthana, Alok Verma, and Someshwar Srivastav were given a clean chit by the high court. 

This isn’t the first time these sites have published fake news to fulfill personal agendas. There are many articles claiming that these are scam sites and generate fake messages on various topics. 

Penalty Save You from a Bribery Case

Can ₹ 10,000 Penalty Save You from a Bribery Case – Know the Truth!! 

Corruption has been feeding on our economy and society for a long time now. The corrupt culture has found its way to crawl deep inside every organizational and social model. Even if we don’t want, we are becoming part of the corruption one way or the other. 

With time corruption has evolved into a major criminal activity, bribery being its core practice. Also, to fight and control this crime, the government issued several laws, penalties, and punishments. Although the punishments for bribery vary from nation to nation. 

In India, bribery is a serious criminal act that falls under Section 171E in The Indian Penal Code. It states that Whoever commits the offense of bribery shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or, with a fine, or with both. 

Now, to get a better picture of bribery cases, let’s try to understand them with a case study. The Manoj Prasad bribery case is probably one of the many high-profile cases that raise serious questions against the government on maintaining law and order. 

Multiple police and CBI head officer’s name get dragged into the dirt. What’s to be noted is that the court penalized the accused, Manoj Prasad, with 10,000 rupees for the involvement. What it means is the penalty for bribery can be lakhs or even crores depending on the type and intensity of the case. 

Also, high-profile cases like the Raveen Roy bribery case and the Mehta fraud case where a large amount of cash had been altered through corruption. Punishments like life imprisonment and a penalty up to three times the bribe amount are paid.  

Every year we hear and read about thousands of bribery cases, what’s important is we analyze, learn and try to make a difference. Say no to Corruption!! 

someshwarsrivastava

Someshwar Srivastava – Terms to Know before Investing in Real-Estate

Real estate can be a great long-term investment, but it’s not for everyone. To make the most of your real estate investments and avoid costly mistakes, it’s important to understand key terms like ROI and leverage. This blog is a compilation of 5 basic terms as quoted by Someshwar Srivastava a renowned property investor and blogger. 

Let’s jump into the blog to know about these crucial terms in detail which will allow you to make good investments in the real-estate business. 

Return on Investment (ROI) 
ROI is important because it tells you how much profit you’re making on your investment. To calculate ROI, divide the total gain by the total cost. So, if you bought a property for 100,000/- and sold it six months later for 110,000/- your ROI would be (110/100) * 100 = 10%. 

The advantage of using ROI is that it can help measure performance against other investments in the same field over time so that investors know whether they are doing better or worse than average under certain circumstances. If these properties underperformed compared to others with similar characteristics, then this might indicate something was wrong with them such as poor maintenance or location issues which would require remedial action before moving forward with further purchases. 

Equity 
Equity is the difference between what a property is worth and what you owe, or the amount of money you would have if you sold your property. A positive equity is when your equity is greater than zero; in other words, when your home has a higher market value than what you owe. This can happen when homeowners have paid off some of their mortgages or have built up positive cash flow on their properties.  

In contrast, negative equity means that the homeowner owes more on his/her mortgage than his/her home’s current market value—if this happens to be true for an investor who buys an investment property and hopes to sell it at some point as part of an exit strategy like Airbnb or short-term vacation rentals (STVRs). 

Cash flow 
Cash flow is a simple concept: it’s the amount of money that a property generates. If you’ve ever had to pay rent for an apartment, you know how important cash flow can be. 

Cash flow is the difference between revenue and expenses—it’s positive when revenue exceeds expenses, which sounds like a good thing! When you’re working with real estate investing and mortgages, however, negative cash flow means that your monthly payments (mostly interest) outweigh your monthly income from rent in that property. You still have to make payments on this property even though it isn’t producing any profit for you (yet). 

You need to understand how cash flow works before making any big decisions or investments in real estate. 

Leverage 
Leverage is the amount of money you borrow to buy a property. The higher your leverage, the more risk you are taking with your investment. In many cases, this can be beneficial as it allows you to make larger purchases without having to come up with all of the cash upfronts. 

For example: let’s say that you want to buy a 400k property but don’t have enough cash on hand for the purchase price. Instead of waiting until you’ve saved enough money from working and living off of savings alone, leveraging enables it you to use other people’s money (the bank or investors) so that he/she can make larger investments sooner rather than later—without sacrificing any equity in return! 

Appreciation 
Appreciation is the increase in value of an asset over time. It’s the difference between what you paid for the property and what it is worth today. Appreciation can be good, if not great, way to make money if your investment property appreciates over time. 

If you purchase a house at 300k (and remember that every market is different), and two years later it sells at 400k, then there was an appreciation of 20%. This means that your original investment returned 100% after 2 years (due to no maintenance costs). 

Conclusion 
There are many other terms and concepts that may be helpful to know as well, but these are the ones that we think are most important. We hope you’ve enjoyed our list of five important property business terms, and that it helps answer any questions about investing in real estate! 

Someshwar Srivastava

Innocents Accused Wrongly Arrested by CBI 

CBI has been reprimanded by the Delhi Court for arresting its own officer Rakesh Asthana & ruining his career. Asthana was arrested on charges of bribery on the basis of an FIR by businessman Satish Sana. 

Sana was involved in a case of Moin Qureshi & was being interrogated by Rakesh Asthana. 

He alleged he sent bribes to accused Manoj Prasad, the primary suspect in the bribery case to help him save face in the CBI case.  

Moreover, he also alleged that Asthana had demanded a bribe from him to spare him any legal action in the case.  

CBI Director Alok Verma had Asthana arrested & ruined his career. Asthana too accused Alok of corruption & later was granted a clean chit from the court. 

Another innocent that was wrongly accused was Someshwar Srivastav who even after cooperating with the CBI was not allowed to visit his family. 

The media has made false claims on this issue accusing Someshwar Srivastav & Rakesh Asthana & not mentioning the main accused Manoj Prasad, degrading their status further. 

One such site is Deccan Herald who in the past has had instances of providing fake news & claims & hiding the real facts.  

The 2 sites below are proof that Deccan Herald is not a genuine source but is Anti-nationalist, gives fake claims in national sports & is Left-center biased due to lack of genuine reporting sources. 

https://www.consumercomplaints.in/deccan-herald-b100139
scroll.in

False News Posted by Scroll.in- Know The Truth 

Media has always been a major force in driving the news to the public. Media has evolved from print to digital media.  

Yet there are many sites who spread false news about many cases.  

One such site is scroll.in. There have many sites claiming that scroll publishes fake news about certain high-profile criminal cases.  

One such case involving Rakesh Asthana has been brought in bad light. 

Rakesh Asthana was the ex-deputy superintendent of the Central Bureau of Investigation. CBI is the primary investigating agency of India. It is also known as the POC for contact with Interpol. 

Rakesh was the investigating officer in the case involving a Hyderabad businessman, Satish Babu Sana. Satish was involved in a case of a meat exporter Moin Qureshi. 

Sana filed a FIR & alleged that Rakesh had demanded a bribe from him to spare any legal action in the case. 

CBI arrested Asthana as per the FIR lodged by Sana. 

Asthana had also alleged that Alok Verma, then the Superintendent, had framed him for corruption & accused him of the same charge. 

The high court ruling had, however, given a clean chit to Asthana and cleared him of all charges.  

Scroll published false news framing Rakesh Asthana & Someshwar Srivastava in false cases downgrading their image.  

We collected sources from Change.org, opindia.com, hindupost.in & stophinduhate.org that have claimed that scroll is a fake news site & every news posted on it is completely false and opposite to reality. 

News Resource –

=>https://www.change.org/p/ministry-of-information-and-broadcasting-ministry-of-home-affairs-ajit-doval-action-against-undisclosed-funding-of-scroll-in-and-block-its-accessibility-in-india
=>https://www.opindia.com/2020/09/scroll-fake-news-fact-check-health-cards-sensitive-information/
=>https://hindupost.in/media/independent-news-media-why-scroll-in-deserves-your-scrutiny/
=>https://stophinduhate.org/hindu-haters-2/media/scroll-in/

The-Indian-Penal-Code-–-Fraud-BriberyThe-Indian-Penal-Code-–-Fraud-Bribery

The Indian Penal Code – Fraud & Bribery Shorts 

1. Wearing clothing or conveying token utilized by local official with deceitful plan. — Whoever, not having a place with a specific class of local officials, wears any clothing or conveys any token looking like any attire or token utilized by that class of community workers, with the expectation that it could be accepted, or with the the information that it is probably going to be accepted, that he has a place with that class of local officials, will be rebuffed with detainment of one or the other depiction for a term which might reach out to 90 days, or with fine which might stretch out to 200 rupees, or with both. 

2. Deceitful evacuation or disguise of property to forestall its seizure as relinquished or in 

execution. — Whoever falsely eliminates, disguises, moves or conveys to any individual any property or 

any interest in that, meaning subsequently to forestall that property or interest in that from being taken as a relinquishment or in fulfillment of a fine, under a sentence which has been articulated, or which he knows to probably be articulated, by a Court of Justice or other skilled power, or from being taken in execution of an announcement or request which has been made, or which he knows to probably be made by a Courtroom in a common suit, will be rebuffed with detainment of one or the other depiction for a term which may stretch out to two years or with fine, or with both. 

3. False case to property to forestall its seizure as relinquished or in execution. — Whoever falsely acknowledges, gets or asserts any property or any interest in that, realizing that he has no right or then again legitimate case to such property or interest, or practices any trickiness contacting any right to any property or on the other hand any interest in that, proposing in this way to forestall that property or interest in that from being taken as a relinquishment or in fulfillment of a fine, under a sentence which has been articulated, or which he knows to probably be articulated by a Court of Justice or other capable power, or from being taken in execution of a pronouncement or request which has been made, or which he knows to probably be made by a Official courtroom in a common suit, will be rebuffed with detainment of one or the other portrayal for a term which may reach out to two years, or with fine, or with both. 

4. Falsely languishing order over aggregate not due. — Whoever deceitfully causes or experiences a pronouncement or request to be passed against him at the suit of any individual for an aggregate not due or for a bigger total than is because of such individual or for any property or interest in property to which such individual isn’t entitled, or then again falsely causes or experiences a pronouncement or request to be executed against him after it has been fulfilled, or for anything in regard of which it has been fulfilled, will be rebuffed with detainment of by the same token portrayal for a term which might reach out to two years, or with fine, or with both. Delineation An organizations a suit against Z. Z, realizing that An is probably going to get an announcement against him, deceitfully experiences a judgment to pass against him for a bigger sum at the suit of B, who has no case against him, all together that B, either for his own or to assist Z, may partake in the returns of any offer of Z’s property which might be made under An’s announcement. Z has committed an offense under this part. 

5. Contemptibility making bogus case in Court. — Whoever falsely or unscrupulously, or with plan to harm or pester any individual, makes in a Court of Justice any case which he knows to be bogus, will be rebuffed with detainment of one or the other portrayal for a term which might stretch out to two years, and will additionally be obligated to fine. 

6. Conveyance of coin, moved by information that it is fake. — Whoever, having any fake coin, which when he became had of it, he knew to be fake, falsely or with goal that extortion might be committed, conveys something similar to any people or endeavors to initiate any individual to get it, will be rebuffed with detainment of one or the other depiction for a term which might stretch out to five years, and will likewise be responsible to fine. 

7.  Destroying composing from substance bearing Government stamp, or eliminating from report a stamp utilized for it, with purpose to make misfortune Government. — Whoever, deceitfully or with aim to make misfortune the Government, eliminates or destroys from any substance, bearing any stamp gave by Government with the end goal of income, any composition or report for which such stamp has been utilized, or eliminates from any composition or report a stamp which has been utilized for such composition or record, in request that such stamp might be utilized for an alternate composition or record, will be rebuffed with detainment of one or the other depiction for a term which might stretch out to three years, or with fine, or with both. 

8. Cheating. — Whoever, by misdirecting any individual, falsely or unscrupulously actuates the individual so misdirected to convey any property to any individual, or to assent that any individual will hold any property, or on the other hand deliberately prompts the individual so bamboozled to do or discard to do anything which he wouldn’t do or overlook in the event that he were not really deluded, and which act or oversight causes or is probably going to make harm or mischief that individual in body, psyche, notoriety or property, is said to “cheat”.

Clarification. — An untrustworthy covering of realities is a trickiness inside the importance of this segment. Outlines 

(a) A, by erroneously claiming to be in the Civil Service, purposefully tricks Z, and hence untrustworthily prompts Z to let him have using a loan products for which he doesn’t intend to pay. A cheats. 

(b) A, by putting a fake blemish on an article, deliberately beguiles Z into a conviction that this article was made by a certain praised maker, and along these lines deceptively initiates Z to purchase and pay for the article. A cheats. 

(c) A, by showing to Z a misleading example of an article deliberately bamboozles Z into accepting that the article compares with the example, and accordingly deceptively incites Z to purchase and pay for the article. A cheats. 

(d) A, by offering in installment for an article a bill on a house with which A keeps no cash, and by which An anticipates that the bill will be disrespected, deliberately hoodwinks Z, and in this way insincerely prompts Z to convey the article, meaning not to pay for it. A cheats. 

(e) A, by promising as jewel articles which he knows are not precious stones, purposefully misdirects Z, and subsequently untrustworthily instigates Z to loan cash. A cheats. 

(f) An Intentionally hoodwinks Z into a conviction that A way to reimburse any cash that Z might loan to him and in this way untrustworthily prompts Z to loan him cash, A not planning to reimburse it. A cheats. 

(g) A purposefully hoodwinks Z into a conviction that A way to convey to Z a specific amount of indigo plant which he doesn’t expect to convey, and accordingly insincerely instigates Z to propel cash upon the confidence of such conveyance. A cheats; however in the event that A, at the season of acquiring the cash, means to convey the indigo plant, and subsequently breaks his agreement and doesn’t convey it, he doesn’t cheat, yet is at risk just to a common activity for break of agreement. 

(h) A purposefully deludes Z into a conviction that A has played out An’s essential for an agreement made with Z, which he has not performed, and accordingly untrustworthily initiates Z to pay cash. A cheats. 

(I) A sells and passes a domain on to B. A, knowing that in result of such deal he has no option to the property, sells or contracts something very similar to Z, without uncovering the reality of the past deal and movement to B, and gets the buy or contract cash from Z. A cheats. 

9. A demonstration or offense is supposed to be committed in outcome of abetment, when it is committed in the result of the actuation, or compatibility of the intrigue, or with the guide which is the abetment. 

Representations 

(a) An offers a pay off to B, a community worker, as a prize for showing A some blessing in the activity of B’s true capacities. B takes hush-money. A has abetted the offense characterized in area 161. 

(b) A prompts B to give bogus proof. B, as the result of the actuation, commits that offense. An is at legitimate fault for abetting that offense, and is responsible to a similar discipline as B. 

(c) An and B plot to harm Z. A, in compatibility of the scheme, acquires the toxin and conveys it to B all together that he may oversee it to Z. B, in compatibility of the trick, mavanages the toxin to Z in A’s nonappearance and in this way causes Z’s passing. Here B is at legitimate fault for homicide. An is at legitimate fault for abetting that offense by trick, and is at risk to the discipline for homicide. . Pay off. — (1) Whoever — 

(I) gives a satisfaction to any individual with the object of instigating him or some other individual to practice any appointive right or of compensating any individual for having practiced any such right; or 

(ii) acknowledges either for himself or for some other individual any satisfaction as a prize for working out any such right or for initiating or endeavoring to instigate some other individual to practice any such right, commits the offense of pay off: 

Given that a statement of public approach or a guarantee of public activity will not be an offense under this part. 

(2) An individual who offers, or consents to give, or offers or endeavors to acquire, a delight will be considered to give a satisfaction. 

(3) An individual who gets or consents to acknowledge or endeavors to get a delight will be considered to acknowledge a delight, and an individual who acknowledges a satisfaction as an intention in doing what he doesn’t mean to do, or as a prize for doing what he has not done, will be considered to have acknowledged the delight as a prize. 

Download the PDF Document Click Here

Someshwar Srivastava

Rakesh Asthana Given Protection from Arrest in CBI Bribery Case 

The Delhi High Court reprimanded the CBI, also known as the Central Bureau of Investigation, to maintain its status in the proceedings against its former director General Rakesh Asthana. Further, they granted him protection from police arrest. The court also directed the CBI to respond to the special director’s petition seeking the dismissal of an FIR against him in relation to a case of bribery involving meat exporter Moin Qureshi. 

Asthana and Devender Kumar, Deputy Superintendent of Police filed petitions against CBI’s case accusing them of taking bribes. The court is hearing their petitions out.  

The National Democratic Alliance led by the BJP sent the 2 top officials of CBI- Director Alok Verma & Special Asthana on leave over accusations of corruption and bribery.  

CBI was instructed to file its response to the two petitions after the probe agency sought more time & informed the court that case files have been sent to the Central Vigilance Commission. The instruction was given by a bench of Justice Najmi Waziri. 

CBI Bribery case 

Sana’s middleman’s no proof link in CBI Bribery case 

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in their report addressed to the court that it found no proof of any call recordings or any media that suggests that Rs. 1.95 Crore was allegedly meant to be paid to public servants, including the then CBI Investigating officer Rakesh Asthana, was delivered to a middleman in December on behalf of Hyderabad-based businessman Sathish Babu Sana. 

On the contrary, Sana had claimed that he had the bribe money delivered to Sunil Mittal, father-in-law of the accused.  

Satish Dagar, the investigating officer informed the special CBI judge that there was no concrete evidence of the claims made by Sana that he had made another payment of Rs. 1 Crore to the middleman & Manoj Prasad the accused, in Dubai as part of an alleged bribe of Rs. 5 Crore to save Sana from a probe against a meat exporter Moin Qureshi.  

However, when Sanjeev Agarwal the special CBI judge asked, further the CBI mentioned they had recovered travel details & WhatsApp pictures detailing Sana’s meetings with Manoj Prasad in Dubai, stated Dagar.