Defence Secretary Shashi Kant Sharma and the vice-chiefs of the three services have failed to convince a Parliament panel with their answers to questions arising out of ‘The Indian Express’ report on non-notified troop movements in the direction of the capital in January.
At least two members of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Defence Shiromani Akali Dal Rajya Sabha member Naresh Gujral and AIMIM Lok Sabha member from Hyderabad Asaduddin Owaisi were learnt to have demanded that Army Chief Gen. V K Singh be summoned before the panel.
Gujral is set to send a formal letter to committee chairman Satpal Maharaj,asking that Gen. Singh be called in to not only face questions arising out of the report in The Indian Express on the mobilisation of Army units,but to also clarify the contents of his leaked letter to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh about the state of the nations defence preparedness.
- Varun Gandhi Under Attack Over Defence Deals: Here’s How
- This Diwali, Let Blind Students Brighten Up your Homes With Candles & Diyas
- CBI Files Supplementary Chargesheet In Sheena Bora Murder Case
- Soha Ali Khan And Vir Das Starrer 31st October Audience Reaction
- Sahara Chief Subrata Roy’s Parole Extended Till November 28
- Simple Tips To Secure Your Debit Card From Fraudsters
- New Zealand & India Team Being Welcomed In Chandigarh
- Mumbai Call Centre Scam: All You Need To Know
- Jammu Kashmir Chief Minister Mehbooba Mufti Appeals To Police: Here’s What She Said
- Shocker From Ahmedabad: Find Out What Happened
- Bigg Boss 10 Day 3 Review: Celebs Fail To Do Well in First Task
- Airtel Offers 10GB Data At Rs 259 For New 4G Smartphone Users
- Aamir Khan Starrer Dangal’s Trailer Launched: First Impressions
- TMC Supporters Attack BJP Leader Babul Supriyo
- Sri Lankan Navy Apprehends 20 Indian Fishermen
The Indian Express on Wednesday reported details of an unusual,non-notified movement of two key Army units from Hisar and Agra towards Delhi on January 16-17,only some hours after Gen. Singh went to the Supreme Court against the government on the issue of his date of birth. The movement triggered confusion in the government,and Defence Secretary Sharma flew back from Malaysia ahead of schedule. The Army units,which had reached close to Delhis outskirts,were halted and sent back.
Appearing before the committee today,Sharma flatly denied that he had been asked by the government to cut short his visit to Malaysia in the wake of the mobilisation of the Army units. He said he had returned early because of a case that was coming up before the Supreme Court the next day.
But the explanation did not appear to have washed. He (the defence secretary) is not a lawyer. What was the urgency to return like that? a committee member said after the meeting.
Owaisi is learnt to have demanded to know why,if,as claimed by Sharma and the vice-chiefs,the movement was routine,the Army units were sent back. Apparently,no answer was forthcoming.
Some committee members sought a detailed explanation from the Army and defence establishment about the entire episode at the next meeting of the panel on April 9.
After the meeting,a Congress MP on the committee said,While they denied The Indian Express report saying that it was a routine exercise,they did not answer specific queries as to why protocol was not followed,why the Army units were sent back and why the defence secretary returned from abroad early. The defence secretary said he cannot react to a newspaper report,but that is not an answer.
The vice-chiefs also faced some tough questioning regarding the Army Chiefs letter on defence preparedness. Congress MP Manish Tewari said that while the defence committee was meeting to discuss procurement and the budget,the Army Vice-Chiefs presentation reflected none of the concerns flagged by the Chief. Tewari said that the Army should send a detailed report to the committee if there are gaps in defence preparedness.
The general mood of the committee members regarding the explanation offered by the defence secretary and the vice-chiefs about The Indian Express story was that it was not convincing. Their answers had many gaps. But if they deny it,you have to take it at face value, said a member.