The AP chief electoral officer is learnt to have asked the Krishna district collector to verify contents of the petition filed by IAS officer (retired) EAS Sarma that secondary education minister K Parthasarathy had concealed that he was involved in a case relating to violation of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (FERA) in affidavits filed at the time of his election as MLA in 2004 and 2009.
The retired IAS officer, based in Visakhapatnam, has sent to EC a copy of Parthasarathy’s declaration that there were no cases pending against him.
Sources said the CEO wanted Krishna district collector, who is the district election officer, to satisfy himself that the minister had concealed information in the affidavits and initiate action in accordance with the law. The economic offences court has recently convicted Parthasarathy to undergo imprisonment for two months and pay a fine of Rs 5.15 lakh for violation of FERA in 1997. (The Act has later been replaced by the Foreign Exchange Management Act). Parthasarathy represents Penamaluru constituency in Krishna district in the Assembly.
Sarma urged the Election Commission to take appropriate measures against Parthasarathy for concealing information. “Concealing information in an Election Commission affidavit is a criminal offence. “I sought action against him because his conviction proved that he hid information while filing his affidavit,” Sarma told Express.
Sources said affidavits filed by contestants in an election are meant for the electors to know and decide the kind of persons in the fray. The Election Commission does not initiate action on its own if the contents are proved false and if there is any concealment of information.
However, if a third party lodges a complaint, the commission could initiate action. Parthasarathy filed an appeal against the conviction in a higher court on Monday.
While convicting Parthasarathy in the case, the special court kept its order in suspension for one month for the minister to appeal against the decision in a higher court. On Monday, his counsel filed a petition in the first metropolitan session court, against the conviction. Parthasarathy stated that it was not his fault and in fact it was the bank that had defaulted on the payment of KPR Plastic Limited to the foreign firm. Parthasarathy’s firm ordered equipment from a foreign manufacturer through Andhra Bank. After 15 pc of the money was paid, the bank withdrew from transaction.
As funds went outside the country, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) registered a case for violation of FERA and imposed a penalty on the firm. As he did not pay the penal amount, the ED filed a case in the special court for economic offences, which convicted the minister.
Comments
0 comment