New Delhi: Even as no business could be transacted in both Houses of Parliament for the sixth day running on Monday, the government, amid the din in Lok Sabha, introduced the Fugitive Economic Offenders Bill, 2018, that seeks to confiscate all assets of absconding fraudsters and loan defaulters for recovering dues from them.
The bill was introduced in the Lower House by minister of state for finance Shiv Pratap Shukla.
The bill was introduced in the backdrop protests over the nearly Rs 12,700 crore fraud at Punjab National Bank in which businessman Nirav Modi is allegedly involved.
The proposed law will apply to defaulters who have an outstanding of Rs 100 crore or more and have escaped from the country.
The minister also introduced the Chit Funds (Amendment) Bill 2018.
Not much business has been carried out since the second leg of the Budget Session of Parliament began on March 5, with the noisy protests stalling proceedings every day, barring for one hour on March 8, when members participated in a discussion to mark the International Women’s Day in the Upper House.
Lok Sabha Speaker Sumitra Mahajan adjourned the House immediately after the Question Hour started on Monday as the TRS, TDP, AIADMK and YSR Congress members stormed the Well carrying placards and raised slogans in support of their demands.
As soon as the Lok Sabha met for the day, Ms Mahajan adjourned the proceedings soon after as protests by Opposition parties and NDA ally TDP over various issues, including the banking scam, special status to Andhra Pradesh and the Cauvery water dispute, continued unabated.
The AAP too joined the protests in Rajya Sabha, demanding an end to the sealing drive in Delhi.
When the House met again at noon, the protests continued but the Speaker went ahead with the proceedings, including introduction of the two bills by Mr Shukla.
Bhartruhari Mahtab of the BJD opposed the introduction of the Fugitive Economic Offenders Bill, saying its provisions violated the citizens’ fundamental rights and that it is based on the premise of “guilty till proven innocent” and not the other way round.
