Sudhir Sharma Appears Before Vigilance, Questions Summons During Assembly Session
Shimla, August 21: BJP MLA and former minister Sudhir Sharma appeared before the State Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau (SV&ACB) in Shimla on Friday for questioning in the alleged disproportionate assets case registered at Dharamshala.
Sharma reached the Vigilance headquarters accompanied by BJP MLAs Satpal Singh Satti, Vipin Parmar, Balbir Verma, Trilok Jamwal, Ashish Sharma, Inder Dutt Lakhanpal, Dr Janak Raj, Rakesh Jamwal, Lokender Kumar, Deep Raj and Puran Chand Thakur.
During the examination, the Vigilance team sought details of Sharma’s income, assets, investments, land transactions and expenditure. It also sought complete records relating to the construction and furnishing of his Rakkar residence, including contractors, suppliers, bills, payments and the financial trail.
The SV&ACB said Sharma failed to furnish even the names and particulars of contractors engaged in the construction and that replies on several financial issues remained evasive. The Bureau has sought documentary evidence to verify his explanations against banking, taxation, property and other records.
Sharma said he was cooperating with the investigation and had nothing to hide.
“Whatever facts are there will eventually come before the people of Himachal Pradesh. Every question will be answered with documents and evidence,” he said.
However, Sharma questioned the timing of the summons, coming during the ongoing Assembly Session. He alleged that the Congress government was trying to pressure the Opposition and divert attention from issues being raised in the House.
“Why summon an Opposition MLA in the middle of the Assembly Session? Such an approach cannot suppress the voice of the Opposition,” he said.
Sharma also questioned why he had been called to Shimla when the case was registered in Dharamshala and the relevant records were there.
“The case is in Dharamshala and the documents are there. Why this urgency to summon me to Shimla? Investigation procedure and protocol must be followed,” he said.
He also questioned how details of the summons reached the media before he received it, claiming that information appeared in the media on August 11 while he received the summons on August 12.
The Vigilance Bureau maintained that the investigation was being conducted professionally, impartially and strictly according to law, irrespective of the status of the person under investigation.
The investigation is continuing.
