Daughter was 'fully aware' of 'help' from Modi govt: Woman's father tells NCW
- Coal scam: Ex-PM Manmohan Singh summoned as accused in Hindalco case
- Supreme Court hands out life term to six convicts in Manjunath murder case
- AAP Delhi MLAs write letter seeking expulsion of Yadav, Bhushan: Reports
- Land to Mines to coal, Oppn stands stall in RS
- BJP line to restive RSS: our ministers may quit if PDP doesn’t behave
Pranlal Soni, the father of the woman allegedly put under illegal surveillance by Narendra Modi's government, is learnt to have written to the national and Gujarat women's commissions, asking them not to take cognizance of the matter even if "any person, body, political party or authority" approaches them.
Soni is learnt to have said that his daughter was "fully aware" of the "help" provided by the state government, and that there "has been no encroachment of her privacy".
"I, on behalf and at the request of my daughter, earnestly urge that whatever help was rendered upon my request is within her knowledge and her own interest, safety and security and there has been no encroachment on her privacy as sought to be made out.
"Kindly, therefore, ensure that my daughter's personal issues be not publicly discussed in the media and if any person, body, political party or authority approaches this Commission, based upon any fact concerning her, let no cognizance be taken by this commission," Soni has said in letters to the National Commission for Women and the Gujarat State Commission for Women.
Both letters were sent on November 17, two days after news portals Cobrapost and Gulail released recordings of purported conversations between Modi's close aide and then minister of state for home Amit Shah and Gujarat IPS officer G L Singhal, discussing the 2009 surveillance.
Hours after the news broke, a statement was released in the name of Soni, saying that he had "orally requested" Modi to "take care" of his daughter and "ensure that she does not face any problem".
In his letter, Soni has told the commissions that "no further probe is necessary", and that a public discussion of the matter, "ostensibly on the grounds that her right of privacy is violate" would, in fact, be a gross breach of her privacy "manifestly for political objectives".