The Enforcement Directorate (ED) on Monday summoned senior Aam Adami Party (AAP) leader and Rajinder Nagar MLA Durgesh Pathak in the Delhi excise policy case.
Taking to Twitter, Deputy CM Manish Sisodia said, “What does our MCD incharge has to do with Delhi govt’s liquor policy? Is their target liquor policy or MCD elections?” Notably, Pathak is the party’s in-charge of the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) polls.
Notably, the central agencies are probing the Delhi excise policy case on the recommendation of Governor VK Saxena, following which the CBI raided Manish Sisodia’s house earlier in August.
Saxena had claimed that Sisodia also extended financial favours to the liquor licensees much after the tenders had been awarded and thus caused huge losses to the exchequer.
Sisodia was among 15 others booked in an FIR filed by the CBI. Excise officials, liquor company executives, dealers, some unknown public servants and private persons have been booked in the case.
It was alleged that irregularities were committed including modifications in the excise policy and undue favours were extended to the license holders including waiver or reduction in licence fee, an extension of L-1 license without approval etc.
The excise policy was passed in Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal-led Delhi Cabinet in the middle of the deadly Covid-19 pandemic in 2021.
However, the Delhi government’s version is that the policy was formulated to ensure the generation of optimum revenue, and eradicate the sale of spurious liquor or non-duty paid liquor in Delhi, besides improving user experience. A report on July 8 by Delhi’s Chief Secretary established prima facie violations of GNCTD Act 1991, Transaction of Business Rules (ToBR) 1993, Delhi Excise Act 2009 and Delhi Excise Rules 2010.
The Chief Secretary’s report indicated substantively financial quid pro quo at the top political level and that the Delhi excise policy was implemented with the sole aim of benefitting private liquor barons for financial benefits to individuals at the highest rungs of the government leading up to Manish Sisodia.
In the latest development in the case, ED on Friday conducted raids at Robin Distilleries.
Earlier on September 6, raids were conducted in Uttar Pradesh, Punjab, Haryana, Telangana, and Maharashtra. (ANI)
The Enforcement Directorate on Friday conducted raids at Robin Distilleries in connection with the Delhi liquor policy scam case.
The ED is conducting searches in multiple cities including Hyderabad, Bengaluru, and Chennai in the Delhi Excise Policy case, sources confirmed. Earlier on September 6, the raids were conducted in Uttar Pradesh, Punjab Haryana, Telangana, and Maharashtra.
Last month, the enforcement agency conducted searches on Delhi deputy chief minister Manish Sisodia’s official residence besides several other places in connection with the alleged corruption in the implementation of Delhi’s excise policy.
The Aam Aadmi Party had been maintaining that the allegations of corruption labelled against them were politically motivated.
A report on July 8 by Delhi’s Chief Secretary established prima facie violations of GNCTD Act 1991, Transaction of Business Rules (ToBR) 1993, Delhi Excise Act 2009 and Delhi Excise Rules 2010.]
The Chief Secretary’s report indicated substantively of financial quid pro quo at the top political level and that the Delhi Excise Policy was implemented with the sole aim of benefitting private liquor barons for financial benefits to individuals at the highest rungs of the government leading up to Manish Sisodia.
Sisodia, who is in charge of the excise department, has been under the scanner for alleged deliberate and gross procedural lapses which provided undue benefits to the tender process for liquor licensees for the year 2021-22.
Sisodia is believed to have executed decisions in violation of the statutory provisions of the Excise Policy, which could have huge financial implications. Such “undue financial favours” to the liquor licensees after the deadline for awarding tenders caused huge losses to the exchequer, sources earlier claimed.
The excise policy was passed in chief minister Arvind Kejriwal-led Delhi Cabinet in the middle of the deadly Delta COVID-19 pandemic in 2021.
The Delhi government’s version is that the policy was formulated to ensure the generation of optimum revenue, eradicate the sale of spurious liquor or non-duty paid liquor in Delhi, besides improving user experience.]
The CBI had filed a case against alleged corruption in the 2021-22 excise policy. The excise policy was subsequently withdrawn by the AAP government.
Sisodia was among 15 others booked in an FIR filed by the CBI. Excise officials, liquor company executives, dealers, some unknown public servants and private persons have been booked in the case.
It was alleged that irregularities were committed including modifications in the Excise Policy and undue favours were extended to the license holders including waiver or reduction in licence fee, an extension of L-1 license without approval etc.
Sisodia had alleged on August 22 that he had received an offer from the BJP to join them by splitting the AAP in return for getting the cases of CBI and ED against him closed. (ANI)
Bollywood actress Jacqueline Fernandez on Wednesday appeared before the Economic Offences Wing (EOW) of Delhi Police in connection with the Rs 200 crore money laundering case involving conman Sukesh Chandrashekhar.
Jacqueline arrived at the Delhi Police EOW office at Mandir Marg earlier today. A senior police officer told ANI that EOW has prepared a list of questions to be answered by Jacqueline. The questions were based on her relationship with Sukesh and the gifts she got from him. She will also be asked how many times she had met or contacted Sukesh over the phone during that period, the officer added.
Meanwhile, Pinky Irani, who had apparently introduced Jacqueline Fernandez to Sukesh Chandrashekhar, also arrived at the office of the Economic Offences Wing of Delhi Police on Wednesday in connection with the money laundering case.
She has been summoned by EOW to join the investigation.
Irani has apparently helped Sukesh to contact Jacqueline Fernandez as she knew both of them. According to sources, Pinky and Jacqueline might be confronted during questioning to get more clarity in the case. Jacqueline has been communicated that her investigation might get stretched for a couple of days or back to back and hence told to plan her stay in Delhi accordingly.
Earlier, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) named Jacqueline in their chargesheet in the money laundering case that involves Sukesh.
The probe agency chargesheet stated that actor Jacqueline knew about Sukesh’s involvement in criminal cases but she chose to overlook his criminal past and got involved in financial transactions with him.
“The set of questions prepared for Jacqueline is different from that were asked to Nora Fatehi, who was earlier called for questioning into the case,” said another officer.
They have to also find out if both the actresses involved in the case were aware of each other receiving gifts, the officer added.
In September-October 2021, the enforcement agency recorded statements of Fatehi where she acknowledged having received gifts from the alleged conman and his actor wife Leena.
ED had registered a money laundering case in the alleged scam over the FIR registered by the Delhi Police. The agency had earlier stated that Fernandez’s statements were recorded on August 30 and October 20, 2021, where she admitted to having received gifts from Chandrashekar.
It also said that Fernandez had used proceeds of crime and bought valuable gifts for herself and her family members in India as well as abroad which amounts to an offence of money laundering under section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act 2002.
Sukesh Chandrashekhar, a native of Bengaluru in Karnataka, is currently lodged in a Delhi jail and faces over 10 criminal cases registered against him.
Chandrashekhar has been accused of extorting Rs 200 crore when he was lodged in Rohini jail, from Aditi Singh, the wife of jailed former Ranbaxy owner Shivinder Singh, while posing as an official from the union law ministry and the PMO, on the pretext of getting her husband out on bail. (ANI)
It took over 16 hours and eight counting machines for the Enforcement Directorate (ED) officials to count the heap of cash that was recovered from the residence of a businessman in Kolkata on Saturday.
ED officials recovered over Rs 17 crore from the Garden Reach residence of businessman Aamir Khan. The central agency found 10 trunks on the spot. However, the cash was found in 5 trunks at Khan’s residence.
The probing agency started the search on Saturday morning and the counting of cash continued till late at night. The ED search team was accompanied by Bank officials and central forces.
Sources said the stacks of notes were mostly in the denomination of Rs 500. However, currency notes of Rs 2,000 and Rs 200 were also there.
The raids were conducted under the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002.
The case was registered on the basis of the First Information Report (FIR) on February 15 last year at Park Street Police Station in Kolkata against Aamir Khan and others based on a complaint filed by Federal Bank authorities, in the court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta.
Aamir Khan launched a mobile gaming application namely E-Nuggets, which was designed for the purpose of defrauding the public, the ED said.
During the initial period, the agency said, the users were rewarded with the commission and the balance in the wallet could be withdrawn hassle-free.
“This provided initial confidence among users and they started investing bigger amounts for a greater percentage of commission and a greater number of purchase orders,” the probe agency said.
It said after collecting a handsome amount from the public, all of a sudden, the withdrawal from the App, was stopped, at one or the other pretext such as system upgradation, an investigation by law enforcement agencies.
“Thereafter, all data including profile information was wiped off from the App servers and only then the users understood the ploy.”
Earlier on Saturday, the central agency had carried out search operations at six locations in Kolkata with respect to an investigation relating to the mobile gaming application.
During the search operation, the ED said, it was noticed that the entities linked to the case were using dummy accounts. (ANI)
The Enforcement Directorate on Friday filed a chargesheet in Delhi Rouse Avenue Court in connection with National Stock Exchange (NSE) Money Laundering Case.
The Chargesheet on Friday has been filed in the court of Special Judge Sunena Sharma. The court fixed September 21, 2022, for the arguments on the point of cognizance. Advocate Naveen Kumar Matta represented ED in the case. The chargesheet stated to have names of Chitra Ramkrishna, Ravi Narain (Both are former CEOs of NSE) and Sanjay Pandey, former Mumbai Police commissioner and a private firm.
Meanwhile, the same court also decided to send Ravi Narain, former CEO of NSE to Judicial Custody in the case. He was arrested recently and was sent to two days remand on the last date of hearing.
Ravi Narain was arrested by Enforcement Directorate (ED) in August 2022 in connection with a money laundering case related to the alleged illegal phone-tapping of the exchange’s employees. Ravi Narain is the third person arrested by ED in the case.
Earlier, the ED had arrested Chitra Ramkrishna (also a former CEO of NSE) and former Mumbai Police Commissioner Sanjay Pandey on the case. Both are presently in Judicial Custody.
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) recently registered a fresh FIR in the NSE Co-Location Case over the allegations of phone tapping.
Following the orders of the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA), the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) registered a case in the alleged National Stock Exchange (NSE) co-location scam that involved the phone tapping of NSE employees.
The ED’s FIR mentioned the names of former NSE Chief Chitra Ramakrishna, Ravi Narain and former Mumbai Commissioner Sanjay Pandey for allegedly tapping the phones of NSE officials and other irregularities.
Pandey is the 1986-batch Indian Police Service (IPS) officer who retired on June 30. During the investigation, it was found that Pandey is closely related to the functioning and activities of a company called iSec Securities Pvt. Ltd.
The company had conducted a security audit of NSE around the time the alleged co-location irregularities have taken place.
The company was incorporated by Pandey in March 2001 and he quit as its director in May 2006. His son and mother took over the charge of the company. It has been alleged that illegal phone tapping of NSE employees was done between 2009-17. (ANI)
Last month the Jammu & Kashmir People’s Democratic Party (PDP) president and former chief minister Mehbooba Mufti said the Centre was “weaponising” central investigating agencies such as the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), National Investigation Agency (NIA), and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) by using them to probe and harass her, her friends and family, and her party leaders. She scathingly remarked that the ruling regime, led by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), was using these agencies as its “mistresses” to target her and her party.
Jammu and Kashmir is now administered as a Union Territory under the terms of Article 239A (which was initially applied to Puducherry is now also applicable to the Union Territory as per The Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019) of the Constitution of India. Before that Act was passed, J&K was administered by a coalition government that was formed by an alliance of the PDP and the BJP. That alliance was ill-fated and in June 2018, it broke down, leading J&K back to Governor’s Rule.
Ms Mufti’s remarks alleging that the Centre is using the government’s investigation agencies to target the ruling regime’s political opponents is not an isolated one. This is not the first time that CBI, NIA, ED, and other central investigative agencies have been accused of being used politically by ruling regimes in India. The CBI is India’s premier investigating agency and functions as a national investigating and security organisation as well as an intelligence agency; the NIA acts as the Central Counter Terrorism Law Enforcement Agency; and the ED is a law enforcement agency and economic intelligence agency that is responsible for enforcing economic laws and fighting economic crime in India.
Targeting political rivals or opposition leaders by using the services of such agencies is not new in India. Successive ruling regimes have been observed to have done it. However, the rising concerns are about the alleged spread of the practice since 2014 when the incumbent BJP-led coalition came to power at the Centre and, subsequently, was re-elected in 2019. The BJP’s clearly-stated objective is not only to make India emerge as a country “freed of the Congress” (Congress mukt Bharat, in Hindi) but also to wrest control in as many of the Indian states as it can. So, its political rivals include, not only a national party such as the Congress, but also several regional parties that hold sway in the states.
The first of the apparently politically-motivated actions by investigating agencies during the BJP-ruled regime began early. Soon after the BJP-led coalition came to power in 2014, investigative agencies swung into action. There were raids at the Delhi chief minister (and vocal opponent of the BJP) Arvind Kejriwal’s office; and old cases against Uttar Pradesh’s Samajwadi Party leader Akhilesh Yadav and Bahujan Samaj Party president Mayawati were revived. In 2019, just before the general elections, the CBI raided the Kolkata police commissioner’s office without a warrant in what was an action quite clearly directed at undermining the Trinamool Congress’ Mamata Banerjee who is the chief minister of West Bengal and also a huge critic of the ruling regime at the Centre.
The list of such political targeting by investigative agencies is long. In 2019, former Haryana chief minister, Bhupinder Singh Hooda, faced raids in connection to old cases of alleged corruption in land deals; Congress MP and political secretary to Sonia Gandhi, Ahmed Patel (who passed away in 2020) was linked to a money-laundering scheme in Gujarat; and the homes of leaders close to the Biju Janata Dal leader and Odisha chief minister Naveen Patnaik were raided before panchayat elections in that state. These are only a few examples of what Indian political parties, particularly those who oppose the BJP, call “political vendetta” against them. Last month, when the ED summoned a Shiv Sena leader’s wife in Mumbai for questioning in connection with a bank fraud, the party’s workers put up a banner in front of the city’s ED office, which proclaimed that it was a BJP office.
It should not be anybody’s case the charges that are levelled by the investigating agencies against opposition politicians are rigged or false. Some (or perhaps, even all) of them may have some basis for investigation. But it is the concerted manner in which the agencies are used that is of concern because it smacks of government interference in the role of the agencies that are supposed to be autonomous and apolitical.
One of the most high-profile cases was the one involving former finance minister P Chidambaram in 2019. He was accused of being involved in the INX Media scandal. Chidambaram was charged with allowing an irregular transfer of overseas funds to the media company. Chidambaram was arrested and the CBI tried to extend his custody many times. But that case has now gone nowhere.
That is the other thing. Many of the cases on which investigative agencies have based their actions against opposition political leaders have either died down, reached a dead-end, or not been pursued after the initial raids, arrests, and so on. While that could reinforce the opposition parties’ allegations that the ruling regime is using the agencies for political vendetta, the more serious issue is about what such a practice could do to the reputation and autonomy of India’s central investigating agencies, which are, by law, meant to be non-partisan, apolitical, unbiased, and independent. If these institutions and their functioning are prone to political interference, not only will their functioning be eroded but Indians will lose their faith in the establishment and its ability to function without fear and favour.
The recent debacle of the Indian private sector bank,
Yes Bank, whose board was suspended and superseded by the Reserve Bank of India
(RBI), once again brings into sharp focus the extent and depth to which crony
capitalism continues to prevail in the country’s economy.
Yes Bank was founded in 2004 by Rana Kapoor and his brother-in-law, the late Ashok Kapur. Early this month, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), registered a criminal case against Kapoor, who was the CEO of Yes Bank; Dewan Housing Finance Ltd. (DHFL), a non-banking financial services company; and its promoter, Kapil Wadhawan. The CBI charged them with criminal conspiracy, cheating and corruption under the Indian Penal Code and the Prevention of Corruption Act.
The allegations are that between April and June 2018, Yes Bank subscribed or invested Rs 3700 crores in DHFL’s short-term debentures. This financial assistance subsequently turned into non-performing assets as the bank was unable to recover the funds. More seriously, the allegations are that in lieu of the amount extended to DHFL, a company, Do it Urban Ventures, promoted by Kapoor’s three daughters, and received kickbacks in the form of loans amounting to around Rs 600 crores. In other words, the CBI alleges that Kapoor and DHFL entered into a conspiratorial quid pro quo: DHFL got the assistance (that have now turned into bad loans) and he and his family benefited from the kickbacks.
Rana Kapoor in custody of Enforcement Directorate
The agency has alleged that Rana Kapoor extended
financial assistance to DHFL to get substantial undue benefit for himself and
his family members via companies held by Kapoor and his family. On March 5,
India’s central bank, the Reserve Bank of India, announced that it had
suspended and superseded the board of Yes Bank. Customers were prevented from
withdrawing more than Rs 50000 from their accounts and rating agencies
downgraded the bank’s core bonds.
Yes Bank’s debacle turns the focus sharply on the
continued prevalence of crony capitalism in India’s economy: an unholy nexus
between banks, financial institutions (FIs), and business enterprises. Banks
and FIs—and not only privately owned ones—in India are known to have cosy
relationships with promoters of large and medium sized Indian companies and
quid pro quo arrangements of the sort that Kapoor and Yes Bank are accused of
are not uncommon. Rather, it is quite the opposite. Examples of misuse of bank
funds are galore in the Indian economy.
One high-profile case is that of liquor baron Vijay Mallya who is currently in the UK while the Indian government is trying to get him extradited so that he can face investigation into charges levelled against him. Mallya is accused of misusing around Rs 9,000 crore (US$1.3 billion), which are loans that his companies, including a now-defunct airline that he started, took from 17 Indian banks. The allegations are that Mallya siphoned off these funds to 40 other companies that he controls around the world.
In another headline-grabbing case in 2018, the CBI
began an investigation into Nirav Modi, a high-profile Indian jeweller, on
allegations that he and his partners defrauded the Punjab National Bank of Rs
28,000 crore, which he is alleged to have siphoned overseas by fraudulently
obtaining letters of undertaking for making payments to overseas suppliers.
Modi is absconding and is believed to be in the US even as the Interpol is
looking for him.
More recently, in December 2019, another high-profile
executive, Jagdish Khattar, the former managing director of Maruti Udyog Ltd.,
India’s largest carmaker, was booked by the CBI for charges against him of
cheating the Punjab National Bank of Rs 110 crore. That case is still being
investigated although Khattar has not been arrested.
These few examples are really the tip of the iceberg.
Nefarious deals between banks and influential entrepreneurs abound in India.
Not long ago, a private sector steel company was embroiled in a similar
controversy when a partly government-controlled financial institution was
believed to be lending it vast sums of money although past loans taken by the
company had turned into non-performing assets.
The curious paradox about such cases is that in many
of the cases, the authorities, including investigative agencies, wake up when
it is already too late. In Yes Bank’s case, the RBI has been issuing warnings
about financial inconsistencies in the bank’s reports. Doubts about Mallya’s
ability to run his airline and manage his finances have been floating around
long before he fled India.
The other, more disheartening, aspect of all this is
the hagiographical treatment that the media have meted out to some of these
controversial promoters and businessmen. Vijay Mallya, now 64, has had
countless laudatory cover stories or “puff pieces” about him. Rana Kapoor, an
aggressive publicity seeker, has found similar success with the Indian media.
Jagdish Khattar was routinely lionised by India’s business press during his
stint as managing director of Maruti between 2002 and 2007.
The truth is that India’s institutions, particularly
in the financial sector, are prone to misuse—either because of the clout of
powerful corporate borrowers or because of complicit bank officials, or both.
India’s government has various laws, organisations and agencies that have been
established to prevent financial fraud. Yet, with regular frequency, shocking
instances of brazen misuse of the financial system come to light. What is needed
is a will to break the cronyism that plagues the nexus between financiers and
their corporate clients. And when frauds come to light, swift dispensation of
justice could work as a deterrent.
We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By agreeing you accept the use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy.
When you visit any web site, it may store or retrieve information on your browser, mostly in the form of cookies. Control your personal Cookie Services here.
These cookies are essential in order to enable you to move around the website and use its features. Without these cookies basic services cannot be provided.
Cookie generated by applications based on the PHP language. This is a general purpose identifier used to maintain user session variables. It is normally a random generated number, how it is used can be specific to the site, but a good example is maintaining a logged-in status for a user between pages.
In order to use this website we use the following technically required cookies
wordpress_test_cookie
wordpress_logged_in_
wordpress_sec
These cookies allow the website to remember choices you make (such as your user name, language or the region you are in) and provide enhanced, more personal features. These cookies can also be used to remember changes you have made to text size, fonts and other parts of web pages that you can customize. They may also be used to provide services you have asked for such as watching a video or commenting on a blog. The information these cookies collect may be anonymized and they cannot track your browsing activity on other websites.
Cookie associated with sites using CloudFlare, used to speed up page load times. According to CloudFlare it is used to override any security restrictions based on the IP address the visitor is coming from. It does not contain any user identification information.
Cookie associated with sites using CloudFlare, used to identify trusted web traffic.
__cfruid
These cookies collect information about how visitors use a website, for instance which pages visitors go to most often, and if they get error messages from web pages. These cookies don’t collect information that identifies a visitor. All information these cookies collect is aggregated and therefore anonymous. It is only used to improve how a website works.
This cookie name is associated with Google Universal Analytics - which is a significant update to Google's more commonly used analytics service. This cookie is used to distinguish unique users by assigning a randomly generated number as a client identifier. It is included in each page request in a site and used to calculate visitor, session and campaign data for the sites analytics reports. By default it is set to expire after 2 years, although this is customisable by website owners.
This cookie name is associated with Google Universal Analytics, according to documentation it is used to throttle the request rate - limiting the collection of data on high traffic sites. It expires after 10 minutes.
This cookie is installed by Google Analytics. The cookie is used to store information of how visitors use a website and helps in creating an analytics report of how the website is doing. The data collected including the number visitors, the source where they have come from, and the pages visited in an anonymous form.
These cookies are used by Youtube, Google, Twitter, and Facebook to deliver adverts that are relevant to you and your interests. They are also used to limit the number of times you see an advertisement as well as help measure the effectiveness of the advertising campaign.
This cookie is usually associated with the ShareThis social sharing widget placed in a site to enable sharing of content across various social networks. It counts clicks and shares of a page.
