BJP MLA Sudhir Sharma questioned for early 90 minutes in disproportionate assets case

Spread the news

Sudhir Sharma questions Vigilance summons during Assembly session, alleges attempt to suppress Opposition voice

Shimla, August 22

BJP MLA Sudhir Sharma was questioned for nearly 90 minutes by the Vigilance Department at its headquarters in Shimla on Saturday in connection with a disproportionate assets case. After the questioning, Sharma alleged that the action was aimed at suppressing the Opposition’s voice and diverting attention from issues being raised during the ongoing Assembly session.

Sharma reached the Vigilance headquarters along with other BJP MLAs after being summoned in connection with the case. He had earlier appeared before the Vigilance authorities in Dharamshala on August 18.

Speaking to reporters after the questioning, Sharma said he was a law-abiding person and had answered all the questions asked by the investigating officials. He said the facts would come before the people of Himachal Pradesh and that he had nothing to hide.

Sharma alleged that this was the first time that an MLA had been summoned in such a manner while the Assembly session was underway. He accused the government of attempting to suppress the Opposition’s voice and divert public attention from issues being raised in the House.

He also targeted Chief Minister Sukhvinder Singh Sukhu over his statement that action was being taken against those who had “looted Himachal”. Sharma said the Chief Minister had never previously held a ministerial or constitutional position and was therefore viewing others based on his own assumptions.

Sharma said if the government believed that people holding such positions were involved in wrongdoing, the complete picture would eventually come before the people of Himachal Pradesh.

Questioning the decision to summon him to the Shimla Vigilance office, Sharma said the investigating officer was based in Dharamshala and the relevant documents were also there. He said there was a defined procedure and protocol for an investigation and questioned why he was called to Shimla.

Sharma further claimed that he received the first summons dated August 12, while a summons dated August 11 had already reached the media. He also questioned the timing of communication with the Assembly, saying he had appeared before the Vigilance authorities in Dharamshala on August 18, while the Assembly was informed only later.