- News>
- Maharashtra
`Money laundering attributes in Kripa`s dealing`
Terming the maze of transactions by former Mumbai Congress chief Kripashankar Singh and his family members as `dubious`, the Bombay HC has held that the leader`s dealings with his son had attributes of money laundering.
Mumbai: Terming the maze of transactions by
former Mumbai Congress chief Kripashankar Singh and his family
members as "dubious", the Bombay High Court has held that the
leader`s dealings with his son had attributes of money
laundering.
"Several transactions shown to have been done between Kripashankar and his son Narendra Kumar Singh are mere counter entries and demonstrate only an attempt to create cross entries, the common feature and attribute of money laundering," a division bench of Chief Justice Mohit Shah and Justice Roshan Dalvi observed while ordering prosecution of Singh and his family for criminal misconduct and corruption.
Raising questions as to why Singh would give several lakhs to his son and take several lakhs from him, the court said on Wednesday, "The report of the Income Tax speaks eloquently of dubious transactions by the respondent 11 (Narendra) remarking that there are huge unsecured loans from builders aside from advance of huge interest free loans and gifts taken from as well as given to friends and family members." Noting that Narendra`s assets were grossly disproportionate to his known source of income as a pilot with Jet Airways, the court said, "The known source of income is wholly inadequate to support his expenses or justify his investments."
Elaborating on the various loans and transactions undertaken by Narendra, the court said, "What could a pilot of Jet Airways have to do with so many individuals and private firms for extensive loans taken without any apparent reason? Can a pilot afford four properties worth Rs 9 crore? We wonder whether he paid even society charges of these properties from his salary income."
"He is shown to be a pilot having been trained in the US upon an expense of a few lakhs of rupees, which lends itself to rejection," the court said.
The court said upon a modest earning of Rs 1 lakh he is shown to have taken the loan of Rs 60 lakh from Standard Chartered Bank for purchase of one flat.
"It is not known what was the security given to the bank, what was the income shown to the bank and how upon an income of Rs 1 lakh a month Rs 60 lakh came to be loaned to him." Similar transaction, albeit of a much larger amount is shown for another bungalow for which ICICI Bank upon its mortgage is shown to have released another loan of Rs 8 crore.
A further loan of Rs 21 lakh is taken for purchase of a BMW car which is shown to be sold for Rs 22 lakh.
"We wonder when the loan was taken and repaid. A second BMW car is shown to be purchased upon another loan of Rs 43 lakh from the same bank."
It said there were cross entries showing amounts of one partnership firm of Today Venture as well as amount invested therein.
"Rs 15 crore are received and Rs 7 crore are invested for no apparent reason. The movable items in his bungalow itself shown to be worth Rs 1 crore. With such dealings his bank accounts show credit balance of not more than a few thousand rupees with one bank account having the distinction of the credit balance of Rs.00.00," the bench said.
The court in its order said the amounts taken as loan were shown to be repaid partly to the banks but fully with interest to the private individuals.
"Standard Chartered Bank is paid Rs 40 lakh as against the loan of Rs 60 lakh. ICICI Bank is paid Rs 3 crore as against the loan of Rs 9 crore. Conversely Rakesh Wadhwa and HDIL Company and Wadhwa Construction Company are repaid Rs 11 crore and Rs 92 lakh respectively which was about the same amount as the loan taken.
"DHFL is repaid Rs 55 lakh against the loan of Rs 50 lakh. Whereas Rs 26 lakh and Rs 39 lakh are taken from Jitendra and Devendra Singh, Rs 56 lakh and Rs 83 lakh are repaid to them. These are rather obvious family members of Respondent No.11," it said.
Along with Narendra, the court also came down heavily on Kripashankar`s wife who has several immovable properties and assets.
"She is shown to have five immovable properties at her native place. No documentary evidence is produced to show since when she owns them or how she acquired them - by purchase, inheritance or by gift. What is intriguing is if she amassed so much wealth legitimately, how come her savings bank accounts show a balance of Rs 00.00," the court questioned.
Pointing out that Malti Devi Singh was shown to have received Rs 75 lakh in forward dealings in commodities like gold and silver, the court said the first transaction was not before 2007. "It is not known how much she had invested initially into this enterprising trade and from where she derived those funds. Her assets inter alia show Rs 1.17 crore invested in these means. The entire amount is prima facie wholly suspect," it said.
While pulling up the Anti-Corruption Bureau for maintaining that the family`s properties were just 11.69 per cent disproportionate to their known sources of income, the court observed, "such calculation would beat out arithmetic as much as our conscience".
The court had on Wednesday held that prima facie case of criminal misconduct was made out against Singh and ordered his prosecution under the Prevention of Corruption Act and attachment of his and his family`s immovable properties.
The setback had come on a day his resignation from the post of Mumbai PCC president was announced by the party in the wake of Congress` dismal performance in the recent civic body polls.
Expressing astonishment at Kripashankar`s "rags to riches" story, the court had said, "He started from scratch in 1970s.
"Until 1998 when he became MLA, nothing is shown to have been acquired by him. He is shown to have earned as MLA a monthly salary of Rs 45000 and in that salary has amassed more than dozen immovable properties. His assets are shown to be 11.69 per cent disproportionate to his known source of income.
Such calculation would beat not just our arithmetic but also our conscience."
The court was hearing a public interest litigation filed by activist Sanjay Tiwari who alleged the Congress MLA had amassed wealth disproportionate to his known sources of income.
PTI
"Several transactions shown to have been done between Kripashankar and his son Narendra Kumar Singh are mere counter entries and demonstrate only an attempt to create cross entries, the common feature and attribute of money laundering," a division bench of Chief Justice Mohit Shah and Justice Roshan Dalvi observed while ordering prosecution of Singh and his family for criminal misconduct and corruption.
Raising questions as to why Singh would give several lakhs to his son and take several lakhs from him, the court said on Wednesday, "The report of the Income Tax speaks eloquently of dubious transactions by the respondent 11 (Narendra) remarking that there are huge unsecured loans from builders aside from advance of huge interest free loans and gifts taken from as well as given to friends and family members." Noting that Narendra`s assets were grossly disproportionate to his known source of income as a pilot with Jet Airways, the court said, "The known source of income is wholly inadequate to support his expenses or justify his investments."
Elaborating on the various loans and transactions undertaken by Narendra, the court said, "What could a pilot of Jet Airways have to do with so many individuals and private firms for extensive loans taken without any apparent reason? Can a pilot afford four properties worth Rs 9 crore? We wonder whether he paid even society charges of these properties from his salary income."
"He is shown to be a pilot having been trained in the US upon an expense of a few lakhs of rupees, which lends itself to rejection," the court said.
The court said upon a modest earning of Rs 1 lakh he is shown to have taken the loan of Rs 60 lakh from Standard Chartered Bank for purchase of one flat.
"It is not known what was the security given to the bank, what was the income shown to the bank and how upon an income of Rs 1 lakh a month Rs 60 lakh came to be loaned to him." Similar transaction, albeit of a much larger amount is shown for another bungalow for which ICICI Bank upon its mortgage is shown to have released another loan of Rs 8 crore.
A further loan of Rs 21 lakh is taken for purchase of a BMW car which is shown to be sold for Rs 22 lakh.
"We wonder when the loan was taken and repaid. A second BMW car is shown to be purchased upon another loan of Rs 43 lakh from the same bank."
It said there were cross entries showing amounts of one partnership firm of Today Venture as well as amount invested therein.
"Rs 15 crore are received and Rs 7 crore are invested for no apparent reason. The movable items in his bungalow itself shown to be worth Rs 1 crore. With such dealings his bank accounts show credit balance of not more than a few thousand rupees with one bank account having the distinction of the credit balance of Rs.00.00," the bench said.
The court in its order said the amounts taken as loan were shown to be repaid partly to the banks but fully with interest to the private individuals.
"Standard Chartered Bank is paid Rs 40 lakh as against the loan of Rs 60 lakh. ICICI Bank is paid Rs 3 crore as against the loan of Rs 9 crore. Conversely Rakesh Wadhwa and HDIL Company and Wadhwa Construction Company are repaid Rs 11 crore and Rs 92 lakh respectively which was about the same amount as the loan taken.
"DHFL is repaid Rs 55 lakh against the loan of Rs 50 lakh. Whereas Rs 26 lakh and Rs 39 lakh are taken from Jitendra and Devendra Singh, Rs 56 lakh and Rs 83 lakh are repaid to them. These are rather obvious family members of Respondent No.11," it said.
Along with Narendra, the court also came down heavily on Kripashankar`s wife who has several immovable properties and assets.
"She is shown to have five immovable properties at her native place. No documentary evidence is produced to show since when she owns them or how she acquired them - by purchase, inheritance or by gift. What is intriguing is if she amassed so much wealth legitimately, how come her savings bank accounts show a balance of Rs 00.00," the court questioned.
Pointing out that Malti Devi Singh was shown to have received Rs 75 lakh in forward dealings in commodities like gold and silver, the court said the first transaction was not before 2007. "It is not known how much she had invested initially into this enterprising trade and from where she derived those funds. Her assets inter alia show Rs 1.17 crore invested in these means. The entire amount is prima facie wholly suspect," it said.
While pulling up the Anti-Corruption Bureau for maintaining that the family`s properties were just 11.69 per cent disproportionate to their known sources of income, the court observed, "such calculation would beat out arithmetic as much as our conscience".
The court had on Wednesday held that prima facie case of criminal misconduct was made out against Singh and ordered his prosecution under the Prevention of Corruption Act and attachment of his and his family`s immovable properties.
The setback had come on a day his resignation from the post of Mumbai PCC president was announced by the party in the wake of Congress` dismal performance in the recent civic body polls.
Expressing astonishment at Kripashankar`s "rags to riches" story, the court had said, "He started from scratch in 1970s.
"Until 1998 when he became MLA, nothing is shown to have been acquired by him. He is shown to have earned as MLA a monthly salary of Rs 45000 and in that salary has amassed more than dozen immovable properties. His assets are shown to be 11.69 per cent disproportionate to his known source of income.
Such calculation would beat not just our arithmetic but also our conscience."
The court was hearing a public interest litigation filed by activist Sanjay Tiwari who alleged the Congress MLA had amassed wealth disproportionate to his known sources of income.
PTI