National Herald case: BJP hits out at Congress for disrupting Parliament, Rahul Gandhi claims political vendetta against party
Both Rahul and Sonia Gandhi will have to appear before a Delhi court on December 19 in the case.
The Bharatiya Janata Party-led central government on Tuesday hit back at the Congress's claims of having a political vendetta against the party in the wake of the National Herald case. The Centre in-turn criticised the Congress for disrupting the Parliament after protests by its leaders led to both Houses being adjourned multiple times in the day. Finance Minister Arun Jaitley said the Centre had nothing to do with the case. He also asked Congress leaders, including Sonia and Rahul Gandhi, to face the courts, saying India is not a banana republic in which the Parliament or media can decide the guilt or innocence in such matters.
A day after Congress president Sonia Gandhi and vice-president Rahul Gandhi were asked by the Delhi High Court to appear before a trial court in the National Herald case, the party had said that "the dirty tricks department" of the Bharatiya Janata Party has been unleashed to target the Opposition. Sonia Gandhi said, "Why should I be scared of anyone? I am Indira Gandhi's daughter-in-law. I am not scared of anyone." Senior leader Kapil Sibal said that Subramanian Swamy – the complainant in the case – is the BJP's "power of attorney holder" to prosecute the party. Rahul Gandhi, during a visit to the flood-hit Puducherry, said there was a "political vendetta" against the Congress.
Both Rahul and Sonia Gandhi will have to appear before a Delhi court on December 19 in the National Herald case, PTI reported. On Tuesday, they placed a petition before the Delhi High Court asking to be exempt from appearing on the same day. The Congress said there were legal inconsistencies in Monday’s High Court verdict. It claimed that the complaint, Swamy, was "completely misconceived" and that he did not have any substantial evidence against the Congress leaders. Times Now reported that the magistrate in the case had been transferred and a new one would be apprised of the case developments.