Devil's Advocate with Lt Gen Avadesh Prakash

In Devil's Advocate this week, Karan Thapar speaks to Lt General Avadesh Prakash, one of the main accused in the Sukhna cantonment land scam case. The Armed Forces Tribunal has ruled that the Court of Enquiry conducted against Lt General Prakash was unfair. Lt General Prakash, who has maintained silence for three months on the issue, says that that's not the only instance of unfairness that he has faced.

Karan Thapar: Lt General Prakash, let's start with the Court of Inquiry conducted by the Eastern Command of the Indian Army last year. You have several reasons for being unhappy with it. To begin with it, you believe its composition was not appropriate for an officer of your rank. Why do you say that?

Avadhesh Prakash: There is a provision in the defence service regulation which provides that when military reputation and the character of an officer, or for that matter anybody is a material issue, then the presiding officer of the inquiry has to be senior wherever possible and all the members at least of the same rank. But in that case, the presiding officer, though of the same rank, was junior in service. But, what most importantly was [that] both the members were major generals, junior in rank and obviously junior in service.

Karan Thapar: Now, you are referring to the Army Regulation 518. Is this breach of the regulation, merely procedural or substantive?

Avadhesh Prakash: I would say it's an important regulation and that's why it is there.

Karan Thapar: A second reason why you have complains about the Court of Inquiry is that it breached Army Rule 180 which says that if evidence is going to be given against an officer which could affect his reputation, the officer must be present. That didn't happen in your case.

But, the Armed Forces Tribunal, on your appeal, has reopened the case. It has given you access to the deposition of the six witnesses as well as permission to cross-examine them. Is that, in your eyes, partial relief or substantial and full relief?

Avadhesh Prakash: I would say that the opportunity given to me now of cross-examining these witnesses would possibly put things in correct perspective because all these officers, the witnesses that came, came in isolation and in my absence. So, some more issues will come to light and put things in correct perspective.

Karan Thapar: So, this is partial opportunity but it has given you an opportunity to correct things?

Avadhesh Prakash: I believe so.

Karan Thapar: One reason why it is important for you to correct things is because you believe that one of the witnesses who deposed when you were not present has allegedly lied to the Court of Enquiry?

Avadhesh Prakash: Karan, I would not like to name this officer and I would also like to say that I have no bias against him. But, this gentleman alleged that he is a victim of my doings as an MS. But, the fact of the case was this gentleman has asked for a posting to a non-family station because he wanted to retain accommodation in Delhi for treatment of his family members.

So it is important that such allegations, which are ill founded, are made in presence of the officer, which in this case is me, so that in case the army rule was applied correctly, this probably wouldn't have happened.

Karan Thapar: So, what happened is that this person claimed that you had been unfair and in fact the truth is that he asked for a particular posting and you agreed to abide by his request?

Avadhesh Prakash: Yes, we did that.

Karan Thapar: So again this example shows that the failure to apply Rule 180 in your case is not just a theoretical disadvantage; you have actually been harmed in fact.

Avadhesh Prakash: This is one example, there are more examples also but this is suffice to say that this is one example which proves what I have just said.

Karan Thapar: Is it then your position that you would have preferred the Court of Inquiry to be scrapped altogether; a new inquiry set up; new presiding officer and new members? Would that have been your preference?

Avadhesh Prakash: Could be…but anyway, decision has been taken by the honourable tribunal.

Karan Thapar: And you are prepared to accept that decision?

Avadhesh Prakash: I accept.

Karan Thapar: But you would have preferred a new enquiry?

Avadhesh Prakash: Yes.

Karan Thapar: Let's come to your second issue of concern. You believe that the Army Chief did not apply his mind fully to your reply to the show cause notice he sent you for administrative action. Why do you believe that?

Avadhesh Prakash: As per my knowledge, the Court of Enquiry was received by the Headquarter of Eastern Command around December 22 or December 23. The show cause notice was given to me on January 11. It means about three weeks of time was taken. I gave my reply on January 22. Then, on January 29, I was given a letter, which says that administrative action has been cancelled and disciplinary action is to be initiated against me. Now, just see the contrast. In those last six days also there were just three working days. You have taken three days to change the action from administrative action to disciplinary action whereas almost three weeks for the Court of Enquiry to be examined.

Karan Thapar: So, to clarify what you are saying is that whereas the Army Chief took three weeks to respond to the finding of the Court of Enquiry, he, in fact, has taken just three working days to respond to you show cause notice. And that contrast leads you to believe that he hasn't applied his mind fully to your reply to the show cause notice.

Avadhesh Prakash: That's right.

Karan Thapar: A second area or a third area of concern that you have is that you dispute what Army Chief said on this programme two weeks ago when he said that he had changed from administrative to disciplinary action after considering your reply. Why do you dispute that?

Avadhesh Prakash: Now let me tell you one thing. That the letter I got on January 29, the first paragraph says that the show cause notice issued to me by the army on January 11 is cancelled and there is no mention of my reply at all.

Karan Thapar: So, let me clarify. If the show cause notice against you is cancelled, as the Army Chief's letter of the January 29 says, then that means your reply to the show cause notice is also cancelled and hasn't been considered. Is that what you are saying?

Avadhesh Prakash: That's right because, there is no mention of the reply at all.

Karan Thapar: And secondly, you are saying that that letter of January 29 wasn't in any shape or form, referred to your reply?

Avadhesh Prakash: That's right.

Karan Thapar: So, this leads you to the conclusion that when the Army Chief said on this programme two weeks ago, that he had considered your reply before ordering disciplinary action, he is not telling the full truth?

Avadhesh Prakash: I won't comment. It is for you to infer now.

Karan Thapar: But, that is the clear inference. Isn't it?

Avadhesh Prakash: OK.

Karan Thapar: Finally, perhaps most important of all, you believe that when the Army Chief switched from administrative action to disciplinary action, it was in flagrant violation of a established and long practiced military policy dating back to 1993. What proof do you have of this?

Avadhesh Prakash: I will show you a letter which is here with me. This letter has been issued by the AG's branch, Army Headquarter, which deals with disciplinary vigilance also. It says, "Once the competent authority, after having applied his mind to full facts of the case decides to initiate administrative action and such action is commenced, at this stage to revert to disciplinary action is not only unjustified, but also legally untenable...unsustainable". The last para of this letter says, "This letter is addressed to the command headquarters." It says that you are therefore requested to bring the contents of this letter to the notice of all concerned for compliance.

Karan Thapar: So, that letter which you are quoting to me, a) establishes army policy that once you have started an administrative action and it has commenced, you cannot arbitrarily switch to disciplinary action and secondly, everyone in the army is required to comply with this?

Avadhesh Prakash: That's right.

Karan Thapar: On the 29th of January, when you received a letter saying that the army was going to take the disciplinary action against you, that also happened to be your last day in service before you retired. Did you, at that point before you retired, point out to the authorities that that was a breach of stated army policy dating back to 1993?

Avadhesh Prakash: The letter was handed over to me on 29th at around 11 in the morning. And 29th is the day when you have beating retreat and the offices are closed at 1 o' clock. And that was the time when I was being bid farewell from the MS branch and that's the time I got this shock - that letter that administrative action has been converted into disciplinary action. So I had no time to complain or to tell anyone.

Karan Thapar: Do you think the timing of the delivery of this letter was deliberate so that you wouldn't have time to protest that they had actually done it so cleverly to deny you the right to protest?

Avadhesh Prakash: Could be. But, I am not in a position to answer that question because somebody else must answer this not me.

Karan Thapar: Let's take a break at that point Lt. General Prakash. I would want to come back and in part two of this exclusive interview, I want to talk to you about what the press called - Sukhna Land Scam, and then about the indictments that you yourself faced.

Karan Thapar: General Prakash, at the heart of what the press calls the Sukna land scam as a proposal to build a school, roughly some 70 acres of land that belonged to the 'Chumta' tea estate; outside the Sukna military station.

The charge against you is that you contrived with the developers to circumvent or overcome the army's objection to this school. But you tell me that the army actually doesn't have the power or the authority to object. Of what grounds did you say that?

Lt Gen Avadhesh Prakash: As you mentioned yourself , firstly that the land doesn't belong to the army. Secondly, a military station is different form a cantonment. In a military station the local military authorities have no jurisdiction whatsoever on the land adjacent to their area. Therefore, I said that they have no right on this issue of no-objection certificate or any claim on that land.

Next point, I also want to bring to your notice, which apparently all of us know. You see in Delhi cantonment - there are schools within the cantonment. But here we are talking of a school outside a military station.

Karan Thapar: So, if schools can exist inside a cantonment, there is no reason that why can't they exist outside a military station?

Lt Gen Avadhesh Prakash: That's what I'm saying.

Karan Thapar: In which case why did the developers seek an no-objection certificate from the co-commander at Sukna?

Lt Gen Avadhesh Prakash: I can just presume. May be when they bring up an issue like that, they just want to have neighbourly relations with the military authorities there. That's all can I say.

Karan Thapar: But isn't it also the case when developers first approach the co -commander at Sukna, he refused and later on he changed his mind?

Avadhesh Prakash: I would like to bring to you notice that in the initial instance - the commercial lease which was there, that was for creating malls and resorts there, which could have been a security related issue. But here the instance has been changed to an educational institute. I suppose that's the reason why co- commander must have changed his decisions.

Karan Thapar: So, he changed his decision because the developers had changed what they wanted to build?

Avadhesh Prakash: Yes, I suppose.

Karan Thapar: So, on the basis of what you have just told me now is just that use of the term 'scam' is inappropriate or even misleading?

Avadhesh Prakash: Absolutely, because the land doesn't belong to the army. No money has exchanged hand. The land remains with the original owners, so where is the scam? I just don't understand that.

Karan Thapar: Let's now come to your personal relationship with the developer, a certain Mr Dilip Agarwal. It said that you know him well and that he is a closed personal friend. Would you accept that?

Avadhesh Prakash: Yes, in fact that's a first line of my statement in the enquiry. I have said it out in front that I know him.

Karan Thapar: Now the indictment against you - the first of the indictment says that in the company of Mr Dilip Aggarwal you met with Maharaja Gaj Singh of Jodhpur and you had discussed the school project. Can you accept that?

Lt Gen Avadhesh Prakash: Karan, I was in Jodhpur. Mr Dilip Aggarwal had arranged a meeting with the Maharaja and he asked me if I would like to accompany him. I thought that possibly of a dignitary of his status and I said let me go. It was more of a courtesy call. At that point of time, Dilip Aggarwal had not mentioned anything to me in any details about this project. I just accompanied him.

Karan Thapar: You make it sound like an innocent meeting. But was it in fact in proper for you meet Maharaja Gaj Singh in the company of the developer?

Lt Gen Avadhesh Prakash: Let me clear it again. Just one meeting doesn't give you franchise, I'm sure. I'm not even aware today. There must be even more procedures before you get a franchise. In the hind side, one can presume that it was not correct. But at that point of time I thought it was a harmless thing to do.

Karan Thapar: The second indictment against you is that in the company of the developer Mr Dilip Aggarwal, you have also visited the land at Sukna with the proposed school is to be built. Was that not improper for you to do?

Lt Gen Avadhesh Prakash: I was on a visit to Sukna. I have spared some time in the evening with the gentlemen, when he approached me and I roam around the area for just five to ten minutes.

Karan Thapar: Just five to ten minutes?

Lt Gen Avadhesh Prakash: Yes, that's right.

Karan Thapar: So, your saying that the time duration was so short, the visit was innocent?

Lt Gen Avadhesh Prakash: I would like to say that there were no proposals and any other such things could have been discussed in five to ten minutes.

Karan Thapar: But on both these issues- meeting Maharaja Gaj Singh in the company of developer, visiting land in the company of developer would you concede that it looks improper even if it wasn't improper. In fact, it looks improper, it looks wrong?

Lt Gen Avadhesh Prakash: That's what I have said. At that point of time in hind side you can percive those things. But I thought there were totally harmless and --

Karan Thapar: --With hind sight it looks worst then it did at that time?

Lt Gen Avadhesh Prakash: Exactly.

Karan Thapar: The final indictment is that you recommended to the co-commander at Sukna that he should give permission for this school and that then you proceeded to also put pressure on him to do so.

Lt Gen Avadhesh Prakash: I admit that I have mentioned to him about this. He had invited me for dinner. Let me give you an example, Like I was a military secretary, I would have got few recommendations from my colleagues, from senior officers and even retired senior officers. After that they would be passed on to the appropriate officer, who would examine those and analyse and put up for direction of competent authority or what ever level. Now if a decision is taken by that competent authority, do you believe that the person who recommended the case would believe?

Karan Thapar: In other words you saying that when you have recommended this case to the Sukna co-commander, your are doing what you have done frequently, previously as military secretary, you treated this just like any other thing or you would treat it as military secretary?

Lt Gen Avadhesh Prakash: I would say that in any case. In case of co-commander, he is Lt Gen and I'm a Lt Gen. Co-commander is also an important person. There are thirteen of them in the Indian Army. I don't have any direct jurisdiction on him. Therefore, for me, this theory of putting pressure on him or influencing him, I think it appears.........

Karan Thapar: So you say that co-commander is as rank as you and he is one among the thirteen. Therefore, he is important and you as military secretary can't put pressure on him?

Avadhesh Prakash: That's right.

Karan Thapar: You're absolutely sure that what the truth is?

Lt Gen Avadhesh Prakash: Of course.

Karan Thapar: Listening to your answers on the three indictments I want to put this question to you. If the Army Chief had stood by his original decision of administrative action and not changed to the disciplinary action, would you have accepted that some form of censor as perhaps on an appropriate punishment?

Lt Gen Avadhesh Prakash: Now it's a hypothetical question. I really wonder what to answer. In the show cause notice I had already denied those allegations.

Karan Thapar: Many people say that at the bottom of these whole story affair, there is a rivalry or a bitterness between Lt Gen VK Singh, the present Army Commander of Eastern command, whose going to be the next Army Chief and yourself?

Lt Gen Avadhesh Prakash: This is absolutely wrong. We have been colleagues as young officers; we had our postings together. There is no question of any rivalry or any bitterness. Even during my tenure as military secretary, he is one gentleman, who had never recommended any case to me. I'm very clear on that.

Karan Thapar: So there was never an instance when you asked you for something which you have refused or which could have annoyed him? Was there no instance of your rebuffing him?

Lt Gen Avadhesh Prakash: No way. I think it is somebody's imagination of some fertile mind which says so.

Karan Thapar: Finally you haven't spoken to the press until now. Why have you not told them your full story?

Lt Gen Avadhesh Prakash: When I was in army, I was bound by the code of conduct and as soon as I retired my case was subjoined with Armed Forces Tribunal. Then I had decided not to speak to anyone.

Karan Thapar: Why you today speaking this to me?

Lt Gen Avadhesh Prakash: I don't know how would I answer it. But I thought I need to speak it to some one or in front of somebody at large. Whatever answers I have given to you, I gave my side of the story. I feel that I must put it across those people for my sake and for my own family. The people have to decide after this interview what is correct and what is wrong.

Karan Thapar: In other words you want to clear your name and you don't want to be thought of as tainted General.

Lt Gen Avadhesh Prakash: Exactly. Media has named me as tainted and dagi in Hindi. I just wanted to clear it all. That's the reason I've come over here today.

Karan Thapar: General Prakash, a pleasure talking to you.

Lt Gen Avadhesh Prakash: Thank you.

(For updates you can share with your friends, follow IBNLive on Facebook, Twitter, Google+ and Pinterest)