National Herald Scam Part-2: UPA Government as Co-conspirator of Gandhis
By S Gurumurthy
Published: 16th December 2015 05:29 AM
Here is the explosive part two of the conspiracy by the Gandhis and their associates to grab the National Herald (NH), which has so far remained hidden. The only defence of the Gandhis in the NH scam is that Young Indian Limited (YIL), which owns and controls 99 per cent shares of the real-estate rich Associated Journals Limited (AJL) is after all a charity company registered under Section 25 of the Companies Act 1956, which rules out any personal benefit to the Gandhis. This defence, itself fake, is blown to smithereens by the stunning new evidence, unveiling part two of the conspiracy. The Gandhi family formula to park the AJL assets in YIL that claims to be a charity company is only one part of the conspiracy. Only that is known so far.
Also Read: |
The next part, the unknown part two of the conspiracy, is to convert and rid the YIL of its charitable facade and make it a regular company. In part two the UPA government also joins as a conspirator. Within four months of the fake charity YIL grabbing AJL’s properties, the conspirators had stealthily moved the UPA government, which was under their thumb, to frame rules to enable YIL to shed its facade of charity and formally become a real estate company of the Gandhis. Read on to know how far and deep the conspirators had gone and co-opted, besides the slavish Congress party, the obliging UPA government in their mission and conspiracy for greed.
YIL: Crime Syndicate
Now probe the claim that YIL is after all a charity company and YIL holds AJL shares for its objects which are charitable. YIL is no genuine charity. It is a facade. YIL’s objects do not include normal charities like relief to poor, or education or medical relief or assisting the disadvantaged sections and the like. Its main object itself is suspicious. Its stated main purpose is to inculcate in youth “commitment to the ideal of democratic and secular society” and make them participate in the “electoral process”. It has everything to do with politics and elections and little to do with charity as normally understood. The YIL’s directors report (April 26, 2012) stunningly says that, “the company acquired the loan owed by AJL” (later converted into equity) “in pursuit of its objects”. That is the takeover of the loan given by the Congress party and acquiring of 99 per cent of shares in AJL are in pursuit of democracy and secularism. How can fraud serve either democracy or secularism? Had the AJL’s loan continued to remain payable to the Congress would that have destroyed democracy and secularism? The YIL’s accounts and annual reports suppress both the loan amount (Rs 90.21 cr) and the fact that it was due to the Congress party; that YIL settled the pliant Congress for Rs 50 lakh and made a windfall gain of Rs 80.7 cr; that is it looted the Congress by almost Rs 90 cr; that the loan of Rs 90 cr plus taken over from Congress has made AJL a 99 per cent subsidiary of YIL; that AJL’s thousands of crores with properties had become YIL’s with zero debt; that, in the process, AJL has turned into a subsidiary of YIL; that YIL holds 99 per cent shares of AJL (whose face value is over Rs 90 crore with real value in thousands of crores).The 99 per cent shares of AJL held by YIL is not shown as an asset at all in YIL’s balance sheet but written off as expenditure, to suppress the very fact that AJL is YIL’s subsidiary. Each one of these actions and omissions indicate fraudulent intent.
Company law says that the balance sheet of AJL (the subsidiary) should be attached to the accounts of YIL (the holding company). The Gandhis circumvent it by saying that they would provide it to the shareholders on request. Who are the shareholders? Sonia Gandhi, Rahul Gandhi, Motilal Vohra and Oscar Fernandez! That is, only the conspirators, who know the facts, will get them — not others including the public. Every sentence and word in the YIL report is calculated to cover up the fraud. It is more a document of a crime syndicate. Between 2010 and now YIL has done nothing in the cause of democracy and secularism. Its report proclaims robbing the Congress and getting 99 per cent of ownership of AJL as serving the cause of democracy and secularism! Its second (August 8, 2013) and third (August 26, 2014) reports repeat, like a broken tape-recorder, that YIL “is still passing through the nascent phase”. The nascent phase is nothing but the stagnant first phase as the second phase of the conspiracy stood thwarted by the exposure of the first.
New Rules to Convert YIL into Commerce
Here comes the most devastating piece of evidence which exposes part two of the conspiracy which is the ultimate aim of the conspirators. Sibals, Singhvis and Chidambarams say that YIL being a charity company, no personal benefit has accrued to Sonia’s family. This ridiculous defence too has gone for a six now as there is clear proof available that the conspirators had designed to get the law amended to convert the fake charitable YIL and formally make it the personal property of the Gandhis. The Company law that was in force till April 2014 was passed in 1956 and for 55 years it did not allow conversion of a Section 25 company into a commercial entity. The Act had even provided that, if a Section 25 company was wound up, its properties shall be transferred to such other company having objects similar to its objects and not to its members. It means that if YIL was wound up then the AJL shares would go to a Section 25 company with similar objects.
The law was clear that the public nature of the charity company should not be diluted. But after YIL was incorporated in November 2010 and it acquired 99 per cent shares of AJL by March 2011, suddenly a circular went around from the Ministry of Corporate Affairs of the UPA Government in June 2011 proposing draft guidelines for allowing conversion of a Section 25 company into an ordinary company. The circular asked for the response of lower authorities and stakeholders on or before July 15, 2011. Does it need a seer to link the June 2011 circular and part two of the NH conspiracy to convert YIL into a commercial firm of Gandhis?
But before issue of new guidelines for conversion of Section 25 companies into ordinary companies could be completed two developments occurred. One, the new Company law Bill was introduced in the Lok Sabha in December 2011 and with the new Bill in Parliament, the guidelines-making process halted delaying the execution of the conspiracy. The next was the exposure of part one of the conspiracy by Dr Subramanian Swamy in November 2012 and his criminal case in January 2013 which effectively frustrated part two of the conspiracy. But finally the conspirators did get the rules they had proposed in June-July 2011 inserted as rules under the new Company law in April 2014, to make way for part two of the conspiracy. Had they come back to power in May 2014 they might have restarted part two of the conspiracy but the people of India frustrated them once and for all.
Rules Tailormade for YIL
See how the rules for conversion made in April 2014 when the UPA was in power were tailormade for YIL’s conversion from charity to commerce. All that YIL had to do under the new rules to shed its charitable facade was: one, pass a special resolution to discard the charitable mask of YIL for which Sonia’s and Rahul’s voting rights alone would suffice; two, state the reasons why the objects could not be carried on as a charitable company; three, mention the principal or main objects to be altered; four, state the altered object and the reasons for it.
These compliances are clerical as the rules do not say that if the reasons are not just the request for conversion would be rejected. Under the new rules, the YIL will need a ‘No Objection’ from the tax authorities only if it had enjoyed any tax concession. It has not. So no okay from anyone is needed. The only remaining thing YIL has to do is to give an undertaking that no part of the income of the company would be distributed to the past or present members of the company. Since YIL has no income and has only losses, it can easily give an undertaking that it would not distribute any income to Sonia’s family and friends.
The most glaring omissions in the new rules passed by the UPA, designed only for YIL and to further the conspiracy, are that it does not bar distribution of the assets of YIL to its members and it does not direct that YIL’s assets should only go to a similar charitable company. Clearly the new rules have been made keeping in mind that YIL should be allowed to distribute its assets, the AJL shares, to the Gandhi family. The ultimate design of the conspirators is that YIL would be converted into an ordinary company and wound up and, in the winding up, the shares of AJL would be distributed to Sonia, Rahul, Vohra and Pitroda, so that they own 99 per cent of AJL directly. But Dr Swamy’s intervention and the court rulings on his case have made it impossible for them to achieve their nefarious designs.
PS: Unless the probe is handed over to the CBI and the court is made to supervise it to remove apprehensions of political vendetta, the full conspiracy involving the UPA government in the National Herald scam will not come out.
The author is a well- known commentator on political and economic issues.
E-mail: guru@gurumurthy.net
http://www.newindianexpress.com/columns/s_gurumurthy/National-Herald-Scam-Part-2-UPA-Government-as-Co-conspirator-of-Gandhis/2015/12/16/article3179815.eceHerald Case Puts Chidambaram Back in Spotlight
By N Ravikumar | ENS
Published: 15th December 2015 04:13 AM
Last Updated: 15th December 2015 04:32 AM
CHENNAI: The National Herald case against Congress leaders Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi has drastically changed the equation in Tamil Nadu Congress, with former Union minister P Chidambaram getting back into the good books of the high command, and becoming the party’s voice across national media.
The change was visible during the flood relief distribution in Chennai, where Rahul Gandhi showed a sudden warmth and cordiality towards Chidambaram, who had distanced himself from party activities ever since TNCC president EVKS Elangovan had gained an iron grip over the State unit.
Rahul, who met Chidambaram at the airport, asked the senior leader to accompany him during his visits to the flood-hit areas. According to the jubilant supporters of Chidambaram, the Congress vice-president offered to take the former in his own flight to New Delhi, in case Chidambaram missed his evening flight. The senior leader accompanied Rahul in the latter’s car.
Chidambaram, who went to New Delhi, has become busy taking up the mantle of defending the Congress leaders in the National Herald case. He is acting as a bridge between the Congress leaders and the media, and spending his time countering the arguments of BJP stalwarts like Arun Jaitley. His supporters claimed that the senior leader has gained proximity to the party leadership and is interacting with them on a daily basis, getting their inputs and giving his suggestions on the National Herald case.
During 2014 Parliamentary election, when the grand old party had not a single ally, Chidambaram had refused to contest the polls, earning the dissatisfaction of the high command. After former Union minister GK Vasan quit the Congress and his supporter BS Gnanadesikan, who was the TNCC president, went along with him, EVKS Elangovan was nominated by the high command, without consulting any of the senior leaders, including Chidambaram.
Chidambaram’s son Karti Chidambaram, who is a bitter critic of Elangovan, was at the receiving end of harsh attacks from Elangovan, who seemed to have silenced all the voices against him. Chidambaram was one of the leaders who met Sonia and Rahul to complain against Elangovan’s style of functioning. But, the high command refused to make any leadership change as the Assembly elections are only a few months away.
Congress insiders say the prominence gained by Chidambaram in Delhi is likely to have an impact on Elangovan’s dominance. Even if Elangovan is not removed from TNCC leadership, Chidambaram’s supporters hope to bag a lion’s share during ticket distribution for the Assembly polls. Elangovan may not be able to deny tickets for MLA seats to Chidambaram’s loyalists.
http://www.newindianexpress.com/cities/chennai/Herald-Case-Puts-Chidambaram-Back-in-Spotlight/2015/12/15/article3177868.ece1
National Herald Affair: It’s fraud all the way – S. Gurumurthy
Posted on November 9, 2012 by Admin
![S. Gurumurthy]( "S. Gurumurthy")
“The Gandhi family usurping the AJL’s Rs 2,000 cr real estate, with the funds of the Congress and through Young Indian, is fraud all the way. On the Congress. On the shareholders of AJL. And on the National Herald. Pandit Nehru said: ‘I will not let the National Herald close down even if I have to sell (my own house) Anand Bhawan’. And now? The Gandhis have buried the National Herald and looted its real estate.” – S. Gurumurthy
The bare facts exposed by Dr Subramanian Swamy on the National Herald affair this month are eloquent, needing very little prose. The fraud is explicit without exposition. Here are the basic facts. Financial crisis forced Associated Journals Limited (AJL), the publishers of National Herald newspaper founded by Pandit Nehru, to close down the paper in 2008. To pay off the employees to help the closure, the Congress Party had given interest-free loan of Rs 90 crore plus to AJL, then.
With the newspaper shut, AJL had become a mere real estate company in 2008, with property in Delhi, Lucknow and Mumbai worth over Rs 2,000 crore in its balance sheet. Against this, AJL owed just Rs 90-crore plus to the Congress. It had very little liability, besides. The balance real estate of AJL, left after paying off the dues to Congress, legally and morally belonged to AJL’s thousand plus shareholders. Big and small, they had contributed Rs 89 lakh to AJL’s capital, when the Rupee was hundred times more valuable. If AJL’s real estate had been sold and cash distributed to the shareholders, Brahm Dev Narain, a teacher holding just 41 equity shares in AJL, would have got some Rs 84,000. Hundreds of others would have got similar sums.
But, by deep design and defying both law and morals, Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi appropriated — actually misappropriated — control of AJL’s Rs 2,000-cr real estate without paying a dime to AJL’s shareholders. In just three months, between November 2010 and February 2011 and in three moves, control of thousands of crore worth property passed onto the Gandhi family. Here unfolds the sordid story.As the first step, in November 2010, a trust company named “Young Indian” was mysteriously formed with a capital of just Rs 5 lakh, in which Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi owned 38 per cent each (total 76 per cent) and two family retainers, Motilal Vora and Oscar Fernandes, owned the balance 24 per cent, making it cent percent Gandhi family outfit. Second, the very next month, December 2010, the Gandhis got the Congress party to assign the Rs 90-cr plus loan given to AJL in 2008 to Young Indian (read themselves) by paying to the party just Rs 50 lakh. The Congress wrote off the balance Rs 89.75 cr as irrecoverable.
This creative — actually criminal — accounting substituted Young Indian for the Congress, entitling Young Indian to recover Rs 90-cr plus due from AJL. Finally, in February 2011, AJL converted the Rs 90-cr plus due to Young Indian into equity shares and allotted them. By this step, Young Indian became almost 99 per cent owner of AJL, and as much of the real estate of AJL. When AJL had assets worth Rs 2,000 cr, why should the Congress write off Rs 89.75 cr due from it as bad debt? Would the Congress have done it for any person outside the Gandhi family? And did the Congress Working Committee or AICC know of, or consent to, donate Rs 89.75 cr to the Gandhis through Young Indian?More. In the founding documents of Young Indian the one word that is totally absent is “Congress”! The design is self-evident. The Congress should be out completely and the Gandhi family should exclusively grab control of the AJL’s lands at Delhi, Lucknow and Mumbai worth thousands of crores for pittance. And it did happen.
The rest of Young Indian’s story stinks even more. With the Gandhi family and loyalists holding its entire capital, the directors of Young Indian — besides Soniaand Rahul, are Motilal Vora, Oscar Fernandes, Suman Dubey and Sam Pitroda— are time-tested friends of the family. But, what is the object of Young Indian? Young Indian says its first annual report (April 27, 2012), “is engaged in activities to inculcate in the minds of India’s youth commitment to the ideals of democratic and secular society”.See what is the first act of this idealist company, after its birth in November 2010, to “inculcate” such ideals in youth. Its annual report shows that the company forthwith started its “operations in December 2010”, and as its first act in pursuance of “its objects”, it acquired the “loan owed” by AJL “for a consideration of Rs 50 lakh”, by which it became AJL’s 99 per cent owner. So the first act of Young Indian to promote idealism in Indian youth was to defraud the Congress party of Rs 89.75 crore on the one hand and the shareholders of AJL of thousands of crores of money on the other. See how the plot thickens.
Young Indians’ annual report discloses a further design — to alter the character of AJL itself. It says that AJL is recasting “its activities” to align its objects, Young Indian’s “main objects”. Finally to merge AJL into Young Indian? And “as part of the restructuring exercise of” AJL, says the annual report, the “loan was converted into equity”. A joke indeed! Young Indian speaks as if it is helping to restructure AJL.Young Indian is a pauper. Its director’s report shows that, from its inception in November 2010 to March 2012, its total income was — believe it — just Rs 800! Its total expenditure was Rs 69.79 lakh and its loss, after deducting its income (Rs 800) was Rs 69.78 lakh. Does the AJL, with huge real estate, need an asset-less and income-less pauper Young Indian for its restructure?
See the deepening design. Young Indian’s annual report intentionally conceals the crucial fact that the loan of Rs 90-cr plus owed by AJL to it was originally due to the Congress party — the intention being that Young Indian looted the Congress should be concealed. The report also suppresses the fact that AJL with asset base of a couple of thousands of crores had become (almost) its wholly-owned subsidiary. It says, in fine print, that shareholders — who? Sonia, Rahul, Vora, Oscar, Dubey and Pitroda! — will get information regarding the subsidiary on request.
This is a fraud on company law, which mandates that the details of the subsidiary be available to the public. More. Young Indian also totally suppresses its 99 per cent holding in the AJL saying that the shareholding “is treated as application on the object of the company” and so “the same has not been reflected as an investment in shares”. This deceptive accounting jargon means that the payment of `50 lakh for 99 per cent of shares of the AJL worth thousands of crores is shown not as an asset, but as expenditure! Why? Obvious.To keep the investment out of the balance sheet of Young Indian! The annual report blatantly lies that since the net worth of AJL is negative, its investment in 99 per cent capital of AJL is written off as expenditure.
The balance sheet of AJL as on March 31, 2011, shows a positive net worth Rs 8 crore; of which Young Indian’s 99 per cent share is Rs 7.92 cr. So the negative net worth story is a fabrication. The real net worth of Young Indian is, of course, over Rs 2,000 cr.And the final lie. After Dr Swamy’s expose, the Congress, with tears in its eyes, told the nation on November 3, 2012, that revival of National Herald, a symbol of Gandhi-Nehru ideals, was an “emotional issue” for the party, as if it has paid Rs 90 cr plus now for Herald’s revival. It had paid the amount in 2008 to help close, not revive, the Herald. Just three weeks before the Congress shed tears to revive National Herald, on October 11, 2012, ‘The Pioneer’ newspaper reported that Rahul Gandhi was emphatic that Young Indian had no intention of relaunching any newspaper. By an email to ‘The Pioneer’, Rahul Gandhi’s office said: “Young Indian is a not-for-profit company and does not have commercial operations…. The company has no intention of starting any newspaper”. Any more evidence needed to prove that the sobbing story of Herald’s revival is fake? A post facto lie?
So. The Gandhi family usurping the AJL’s Rs 2,000 cr real estate, with the funds of the Congress and through Young Indian, is fraud all the way. On the Congress. On the shareholders of AJL. And on the National Herald.Pandit Nehru said: “I will not let the National Herald close down even if I have to sell (my own house) Anand Bhawan”. And now? The Gandhis have buried the National Herald and looted its real estate. – The New Indian Express, 8 November 2012
» S. Gurumurthy is a well-known commentator on political and economic issues. E-mail: comment@gurumurthy.net
https://bharatabharati.wordpress.com/2012/11/09/national-herald-affair-its-fraud-all-the-way-s-gurumurthy/
JUL
1
SoniaG, RahulG Heraldgate: Dr. Subramanian Swamy, S. Gurumurthy, Sandhya Jain on the other 2G: SoniaG, RahulG
SoniaG, RahulG Heraldgate saga as it unfolded: Difference between National Herald scam and 2G scam: @1947 vs. @2001 prices -- MRV. One is Rs. Second convertible currency.National Herald
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
November 19, 2012
Heraldgate: Facts Of The Case
Guest column by Subramanian Swamy
The daily explosion of scams and their nightly celebration over noisy TV shows have dulled the collective response. No wonder, the biggest of them — the Gandhi family’s illegal takeover of the properties of National Herald — has gone largely unnoticed
To begin with, and briefly: In 2011, Ms Sonia Gandhi and her son, Rahul Gandhi, both MPs and hence public servants under the Prevention of Corruption Act, had floated under Section 25 of the Companies Act, a company called Young Indian Private Ltd.
Sonia & Rahul Gandhi
The Ma-Beta corrupt duo hold 76 per cent of the total equity (38% shares each) in the company, while Motilal Vora, the Congress party Treasurer and Oscar Fernandes, held the remaining 24 per cent. If any person or group holds more than 74 per cent of a company’s equity, then that company can be virtually administered without caring for other shareholders. Thus, Young Indian is a Gandhi private enterprise that is to be directly administered by the duo.
Now we come to the brazen corrupt plot of the duo to acquire another well endowed asset-wise. The Associated Journals Private Ltd (AJPL) is that other company. AJPL is the owner-publisher of National Herald, Navjivan, and Quami Awaz newspapers, set up by prominent Congress leaders in 1938. Jawarharlal Nehru became President of the company.
Because its object was to publish a newspaper, APJL acquired at concessional rates from Central and state governments high-value real estate properties in Delhi, Mumbai, Bhopal, Indore, Haryana, and several places in Uttar Pradesh. In some cities, like Delhi and Lucknow, it built massive offices with the help of public donations for the publishing its newspapers.
But like all Nehru-Gandhi “enterprises”, AJPL’s main mission of publishing newspapers soon ended in failure. By 1970s, all three newspapers were running in terrible losses, andeven failed to pay its employees their wages and salaries. Labour agitation forced the owners to declare lockout. The shareholders’ list by then had got depleted by death, or alienation, or sale and thus AJPL came fully into the grip of the Nehru dynasty with family retainer Motilal Vora as chowkidar-president.
By 2008 or a little earlier, Rahul Gandhi was inducted as a shareholder in AJPL. Rahul Gandhi neglected disclosing this crucial fact in his sworn affidavit filed as a candidate in the 2009 Lok Sabha election. In his sworn assets statement, he has declared as ‘Nil’ his shares in companies, when in fact he owned at least 3 lakh shares in AJPL, as well as the controlling shares in Back-Ops, a company that he set up in the early 2000s. Back Ops’ ownership was later handed over to sister Priyanka by a back-dated letter in 2009,who then promptly wound up the company in 2011 — maintaining the family tradition of failed enterprises. The assets acquired following Back-Ops liquidation went into Priyanka’s folder.
In 2010, “Operation AJPL acquisition” [Sic: Better Operation Grab”] began by Young Indian and executed in four steps:
1) Moribund AJPL obtains an unsecured zero interest loan of more than Rs 90 crore from the All India Congress Committee in 2011 with no stated purpose (but now the spin given by Congress spokesman Devendra Dwidedi is that the loan was to fulfill the “emotional attachment” of the Congress party towards National Herald). Section 13A of the Income Tax Act read with Section 29 A to C of the Representation of the People Act prohibits any political party from giving loans to commercial or related enterprises.Note: Motilal Vora is President of AJPL which received the loan, he is Treasurer of AICC which gave the loan, and he is also a share holder and Director in Young Indian, the prospective buyer of AJPL!
[Sic: Vora is president of the company (AJPL) that received the loan and also treasurer of the Congress (AICC) which gave the loan! And he is also shareholder and director of Young Indian which bought AJPL including the money loaned by the Congress whose treasurer is Vora himself! So it is Vora to Vora to Vora. All this mere coincidence of course. NSR]
2) Young Indian enters the picture with a proposal made by Young Indian Director Motilal Vora to AJPL president Motilal Vora that he will speak to AICC Treasurer Motilal Vora to unburden AJPL of the loans due to AICC by a financial derivative of transfer of liability to Young Indian. Note: It helps that Sonia Gandhi is AICC president and Rahul Gandhi is AICC senior-most General Secretary.
3) AJPL, acting by a mere Board Resolution dated February 20, 2012 and not by a Shareholders Meeting, sells by transfer of shares to Young Indian for a mere Rs 50 lakh. It is casually overlooked that Young Indian is not a media company which therefore cannot buy a media company that has got land allotted by government and obtainedbank loans on the condition that it is a media company producing newspapers.
Before buying AJPL, Rahul G transfers 2,62,411 of his 3 lakh shares in AJPL to sister Priyanka. Robert Vadra is left out of the deal because Aruna Roy will see to it that Kejriwal will cut him to size, with Ahmed Patel ensuring 24×7 media publicity to scare the wits out of Mr Vadra. [Sic: Mr. Vadra is now believed to be holed up in Dubai or Qatar where Sonia G. and her family (mother and sisters) mostly reside. NSR]
4) The seven-storey Herald House on Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg in New Delhi is now securely with Young Indian. Mother and son decide to rent its space out to government departments and blue chip companies. The Ministry of External Affairs takes two whole floors to open a Passport Seva Kendra which is inaugurated by the then Minister, SM Krishna. Companies interested in renting space are charged six months’ rent in advance.
Sacrificing Sonia or Smt 420?
Thus, the deal was to grab Herald House, whose market worth is reportedly Rs 1,600 crore, and other properties of National Herald/Quami Awaz in Delhi, and another Rs 3,400 crore in different parts of UP, Maharasthra and MP for which Young Indian made a commitment to pay a mere Rs 50 lakh to AICCfor owning the Rs 90 crore odd obtained from AICC as an unsecured zero interest loan and now written off by the AICC. [Sic: 60 lakhs turned into 90 crores to acquire assets worth at least 3000 crores! So, Sonia Gandhi’s ‘sacrifice’ in 2004 after she failed to become PM in 1999 with false numbers of MPs has borne rich fruit. NSR]
Litany of illegalities
Now what illegalities have been committed?
1) The deal is a sham, bogus, and a violation of several laws including Companies, Income-Tax Act, Indian Penal Code Sections 405-08, 420, 467, and 193; Election Law, and Government Residence Allotment Rules.
2) The un-built on land in Mumbai, Indore, Bhopal, Punchkula, Lucknow etc., etc., have been illegally sold to builders of luxury sky scrapers, mall, and housing for Congress Ministers. This is violation of the land allotment orders and a criminal breach of trust.
3) Young Indian filed statements with the RoC in March 2012 disclosing that the shareholders meetings were held in Sonia Gandhi’s Government allotted 10, Janpath . This is in violation of the law since the 10, Janpath, New Delhi is Government provided accommodation for residence, which cannot be used for commercial purposes and business.
4) More than 80 per cent of the persons mentioned in the 2011 shareholders list filed with the RoC are deceased, such prominent persons such as Jawaharlal Nehru, Indira Gandhi, Sharda Prasad, GD Birla etc., as also some defunct Kolkata based companies. Hence the Board Meeting of AJPL handing over the company to Young Indian is violation of the Companies Act and is an offence as well as a fraud on the public.
I urge therefore an immediate SFIO/CBI probe into this dubious stinking deal between Young India and The Associated Journals, and from the Election Commission for the illegality of the AICC I giving a loan to a private company.
Rahul Gandhi also committed perjury when he stated in his election nomination in 2009 that he owned ‘NIL’ shares when he owned in fact over 3 lakh shares of AJPL in 2009.
The bottom line is that National Herald, for which great grand-father Nehru pompously said:”I will sell Anand Bhavan but never National Herald”, has been strangulated to death by Rahul Gandhi and his mother. Young Indian’s objectives do not include bring out a newspaper. Rahul Gandhi himself told the PTI on October 9, 2012 after swallowing AJPL that “We have no intention to start or revive a newspaper”. The last gasp of National Herald, Navjivan, and Quami Awaz has been heard. For just Rs 50 lakh, Rs 5000 crore of property have been obtained.
Ironically, Herald House is built on a cemetery on Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg. The Mama-son duo know of the Biblical saying — from dust to dust.
(The Writer Is President, Janata Party)
Http://Folks.Co.In/Blog/2012/11/19/Heraldgate-Facts-Of-The-Case/
November 9, 2012
Congress Calculus II: Expert Says It Is Criminal Fraud
Anand BhawanAssociated Journals LimitedBalance Real EstateBoard Director And ChairmanBrahm Dev NarainCompany LawCompany Law AmountingCongressCongress PartyCongress ShedCongress Working CommitteeCorporate OfficialCr Real EstateDeceptive Accounting JargonDelhiDirectorEditorGandhiHuge Real EstateIndiaIndian Independence MovementIndian National CongressIndian PeopleLaw EnforcementLawyerLok SabhaLucknowManmohan SinghMere Real EstateMotilal VoraMumbaiNational HeraldNehru-Gandhi FamilyOscar FernandesPranab MukherjiPresidentRahul GandhiReal EstateReorganizationRsS. GurumurthySam PitrodaSonia GandhiSubramanian SwamySuman DubeyTeacherThe HeraldThe National HeraldThe New Indian ExpressTHE PIONEERYoung Indian
The National Herald affair involving the Congress party, Sonia and Rahul Gandhi is not just a political scandal but a fraudulent and possibly criminal enterprise, according to the author, one of the country’s leading experts on corporate accounting and law.
Guest column by S. Gurumurthy
Editor’s introduction: In a previous column, Sandhya Jain had presented the gist of the growing scandal over the misappropriation by Sonia and Rahul Gandhi of the assets of the National Herald and related papers through a bogus trust called Young Indian withthe help of money stolen from the Congress party coffers. Based on my limited experience as a corporate official (as a board director and chairman) I expressed the view that there seemed to some violations of company law. Not being an expert in these fields I was hesitant to go beyond that.
Fortunately we now have an authoritative opinion on the National Herald affair by S. Gurumurthy, one of India’s leading experts on corporate financial practices. FOLKS is grateful to Sri Gurumurthy and the New Indian Express where it appeared on November 8 under the title “National Herald affair: It’s fraud all the way” for allowing FOLKS to carry it. It is slightly edited for clarity and emphasis keeping the readers in mind. [NSR]
Daylight robbery in the name of saving Nehru’s legacy
National Herald affair
The bare facts exposed by Dr Subramanian Swamy on the National Herald affair this month are eloquent, needing very little prose. The fraud is explicit without exposition. Here are the basic facts. Financial crisis forced Associated Journals Limited (AJL), the publishers of National Herald newspaper founded by Pandit Nehru, to close down the paper in 2008. To pay off the employees to help the closure, the Congress Party had given interest-free loan of Rs 90 crore plus to AJL, then.
With the newspaper shut, AJL had become a mere real estate company in 2008, withproperty in Delhi, Lucknow and Mumbai worth over Rs 2,000 crore in its balance sheet. Against this, AJL owed just Rs 90-crore plus to the Congress. It had very little liability, besides. The balance real estate of AJL, left after paying off the dues to Congress, legally and morally belonged to AJL’s thousand plus shareholders. Big and small, they had contributed Rs 89 lakh to AJL’s capital, when the Rupee was hundred times more valuable. If AJL’s real estate had been sold and cash distributed to the shareholders, Brahm Dev Narain, a teacher holding just 41 equity shares in AJL, would have got some Rs 84,000. Hundreds of others would have got similar sums.
But, by deep design and defying both law and morals, Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi appropriated — actually misappropriated — control of AJL’s Rs 2,000-cr real estate without paying a dime to AJL’s shareholders. In just three months, between November 2010 and February 2011 and in three moves, control of thousands of crore worth property passed onto the Gandhi family. Here unfolds the sordid story.
Enter (bogus) ‘Young Indian’
As the first step, in November 2010, a trust company named “Young Indian” was mysteriously formed with a capital of just Rs 5 lakh, in which Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi owned 38 per cent each (total 76 per cent) and two family retainers, Motilal Vora and Oscar Fernandes, owned the balance 24 per cent, making it cent percent Gandhi family outfit. Second, the very next month, December 2010, the Gandhis got the Congress party to assign the Rs 90-cr plus loan given to AJL in 2008 to Young Indian (read themselves) by paying to the party just Rs 50 lakh. The Congress wrote off the balance Rs 89.75 cr as irrecoverable.
This creative — actually criminal — accounting substituted Young Indian for the Congress, entitling Young Indian to recover Rs 90-cr plus due from AJL. Finally, in February 2011, AJL converted the Rs 90-cr plus due to Young Indian into equity shares and allotted them. By this step, Young Indian became almost 99 per cent owner of AJL, and as much of the real estate of AJL. When AJL had assets worth Rs 2,000 cr, why should the Congress write off Rs 89.75 cr due from it as bad debt? [Sic: Who authorized payment of this ‘bad loan’ to young Indian in the first place? You get only one guess. NSR]
Would the Congress have done it for any person outside the Gandhi family? And did the Congress Working Committee or AICC know of, or consent to, donate Rs 89.75 cr to the Gandhis through Young Indian? More. In the founding documents of Young Indian the one word that is totally absent is “Congress”! The design is self-evident. The Congress should be out completely and the Gandhi family should exclusively grab control of the AJL’s lands at Delhi, Lucknow and Mumbai worth thousands of crores for pittance. And it did happen.
The rest of Young Indian’s story stinks even more. With the Gandhi family and loyalists holding its entire capital, the directors of Young Indian — besides Sonia and Rahul, are Vora, Oscar, Suman Dubey and Sam Pitroda — are time-tested friends of the family. But, what is the object of Young Indian? Young Indian says its first annual report (April 27, 2012), “is engaged in activities to inculcate in the minds of India’s youth commitment to the ideals of democratic and secular society”.
See what is the first act of this idealist company, after its birth in November 2010, to “inculcate” such ideals in youth? Its annual report shows that the company forthwith started its “operations in December 2010”, and as its first act in pursuance of “its objects”, it acquired the “loan owed” by AJL “for a consideration of Rs 50 lakh”, by which it became AJL’s 99 per cent owner. So the first act of Young Indian to promote idealism in Indian youth was to defraud the Congress party of Rs 89.75 crore on the one hand and the shareholders of AJL of thousands of crores of money on the other. See how the plot thickens.
Young Indians’ annual report discloses a further design — to alter the character of AJL itself. It says that AJL is recasting “its activities” to align its objects, Young Indian’s “main objects”. Finally to merge AJL into Young Indian? And “as part of the restructuring exercise of” AJL, says the annual report, the “loan was converted into equity”. A joke indeed! Young Indian speaks as if it is helping to restructure AJL.Young Indian is a pauper. Its director’s report shows that, from its inception in November 2010 to March 2012, its total income was — believe it — just Rs 800! Its total expenditure was Rs 69.79 lakh and its loss, after deducting its income (Rs 800) was Rs 69.78 lakh. Does the AJL, with huge real estate, need an asset-less and income-less pauper Young Indian for its restructure?
Erasing ties to the Congress
See the deepening design. Young Indian’s annual report intentionally conceals the crucial fact that the loan of Rs 90-cr plus owed by AJL to it was originally due to the Congress party — the intention being thatYoung Indian looted the Congress should be concealed. The report also suppresses the fact that AJL with asset base of a couple of thousands of crores had become (almost) its wholly-owned subsidiary [of Young Indian, a front for Sonia and Rahul]. It says, in fine print, that shareholders — who? Sonia, Rahul, Vora, Oscar, Dubey and Pitroda! — will get information regarding the subsidiary on request.
This is a fraud on company law, which mandates that the details of the subsidiary be available to the public. More. Young Indian also totally suppresses its 99 per cent holding in the AJL saying that the shareholding “is treated as application on the object of the company” and so “the same has not been reflected as an investment in shares”. This deceptive accounting jargon means that the payment of `50 lakh for 99 per cent of shares of the AJL worth thousands of crores is shown not as an asset, but as expenditure! Why? Obvious.
To keep the investment out of the balance sheet of Young Indian! The annual report blatantly lies that since the net worth of AJL is negative, its investment in 99 per cent capital of AJL is written off as expenditure.
The balance sheet of AJL as on March 31, 2011, shows a positive net worth Rs 8 crore; of which Young Indian’s 99 per cent share is Rs 7.92 cr. So the negative net worth story is a fabrication. The real net worth of Young Indian is, of course, over Rs 2,000 cr.
Crocodile tears
And the final lie. After Dr Swamy’s expose, the Congress, with tears in its eyes, told the nation on November 3, 2012, that revival of National Herald, a symbol of Gandhi-Nehru ideals, was an “emotional issue” for the party, as if it has paid Rs 90 cr plus now for Herald’s revival.
It had paid the amount in 2008 to help close, not revive, the Herald. Just three weeks before the Congress shed tears to revive National Herald, on October 11, 2012, ‘The Pioneer’ newspaper reported that Rahul Gandhi was emphatic that Young Indian had no intention of re-launching any newspaper. By an email to ‘The Pioneer’, Rahul Gandhi’s office said: “Young Indian is a not-for-profit company and does not have commercial operations…. The company has no intention of starting any newspaper”. Any more evidence needed to prove that the sobbing story of Herald’s revival is fake? A post facto lie?
So the Gandhi family usurping the AJL’s Rs 2,000 cr real estate, with the funds of the Congress and through Young Indian, is fraud all the way: On the Congress. On the shareholders of AJL. And on the National Herald.
Pandit Nehru said: “I will not let the National Herald close down even if I have to sell (my own house) Anand Bhawan”. And now? The Gandhis [Sic: Sonia and Rahul. NSR] have buried the National Herald and looted its real estate.
Editor’s comment: Nothing needs to be added to what Gurumurthy has exposed in his expert column. It is a case of gross violation of company law amounting possibly to criminal fraud. My lawyer friends tell me it is a fit case for criminal prosecution. The question really is the political will and the integrity of the nation’s judiciary and law enforcement. Do they have the courage to go after these fraudsters or are they too scared of the possible repercussions? It is a test of their manliness.
The same applies to Manmohan Singh and President Pranab Mukherji. It is an open challenge to them— to prove their fitness for the high office they hold or be shown up as little men happy to be Gandhi family’s litter carriers. There is no sitting on the fence this time. History will judge them by what they do or don’t do with this venal duo.
Published On: Mon, Nov 5th, 2012
Columns / Guest Columns | By Team Folks
Congress Calculus Brings “Roma Rajya”
Column by Sandhya Jain with introduction by Dr. N.S. Rajaram, Contributing Editor, Folks Magazine.
Indian National Congress is no longer a political party. It is a family business run out of 10 Janpath in New Delhi. Its methods and mores smack of the Italian Mafia which sees law and courts as nuisances to be dispensed with when inconvenient.
Roma way of dealing with evil
This is the conclusion that follows from the article below that appeared in Niti Central under the title “Congress’s unique book-keeping culture.”
Editor’s introduction: The long and sordid record of the Gandhi family, ever since Antonia Maino a.k.a. Sonia Gandhi took over the reins of the Congress shows that it has nothing but contempt for the law of the land, which its members have regularly flouted by signing false affidavits, setting up bogus firms and trusts, interfering with the judiciary, intimidating officials, misusing national institutions like the CBI and the like.
In the specific context of the shenanigans described in the article below, a technical point worth noting is that an “interest free loan” is in reality a gift. All the ‘borrower’ has to do is deposit it in a bank and collect interest. That is the reason why economists talk about the time value of money. It is a basic principle of economics. One can be sure this simple fact lies within the comprehension of a middle-aged child prodigy like Sri Rahul Gandhi.(Editor)
Congress’s unique book-keeping culture
The controversy over the transfer of shares and ownership of the properties and assets of The Associated Journals Ltd to Young Indian, a private firm owned mainly by Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi, raises several questions of legality and morality in the conduct of affairs of the Jawaharlal Nehru-founded company from its inception to its recentcontentious dissolution.
These merit a full inquiry into the functioning of the company as well as the plethora of trusts and entities associated with the Nehru-Gandhi dynasty to determine if they are functioning as per their mandate or should be wound up. It is pertinent to recall that former Prime Minister Chandra Shekhar had urged Prime Minister Manmohan Singh before his death in 2007 to take over all trusts he [Sic: Manmohan Singh] was associated with so that the properties were not misused by persons not associated with the original mandate for which they were created.
Associated Journals was set up at the initiative of Jawaharlal Nehru on November 19, 1937 (birthday of his daughter Indira) under the Indian Companies Act, 1913. It had a capital of Rs 5 lakh divided into 2000 Preference Shares of Rs 100 each carrying a fixed but non-cumulative dividend of five per cent per annum and 30,000 ordinary shares of Rs 10 each.
The Memorandum of Association announced its objective, “To establish and to carry on in the United Provinces and elsewhere the business of news agency, newspaper and magazine proprietors, printers and publishers and all similar and incidental trades thereof and in this connection to do all such things as may appear to the Directors to be in the interests of the Company” [3 (a)].
The signatories included Jawaharlal Nehru, Purushottamdas Tandon, J Narendra Deva, Kailash Nath Katju, Rafi Ahmad Kidwai, Mohan Lal Sakra and Krishna Dutta Paliwal. The document was witnessed by Govind Ballabh Pant.
That this venture was intended to be commercially viable is stated in article 3 (d) that the company may carry on any other business “which may seem to the company capable to being carried on in connection with the above or calculated directly or indirectly to enhance the value or render profitable any of the company’s property or rights”. [Sic: It was not intended as a charitable institution but a business. NSR]
Though its founders became the ruling establishment of independent India, National Herald, Qaumi Awaz and other papers launched by them never acquired the iconic status of Bal Gangadhar Tilak’s Kesari, Sri Aurobindo’s Bande Mataram, and others that the British Raj crushed with unsparing brutality. After independence, the Herald Group survived on crutches provided by the ruling party and family until even that became unsustainable. [Sic: That is to say it failed as a business. NSR]
Janata Party leader Subramanian Swamy at a Press conference on November 1, 2012, pointed out that in the list of shareholders furnished to the Registrar of Companies, as many as 80 per cent were dead and many firms defunct.
Rulers of the Roma Rajya
This is no clerical error but points to a deeper malaise, namely, that after assuming the reins of power in Delhi, the family of the first Prime Minister began to regard and treat the National Herald Group as personal property. As most outsiders thought it was a public trust, no one questioned the manner in which it functioned until its sale to Young Indian opened the proverbial can of worms.
[Sic: It was sold as a business, and not as a trust which it never was nor intended to be. When a shareholder dies and his or her shares are not legally transferred to an eligible person, it reduces the number of shares but the share capital remains the same. As a result the value of each remaining share increases. NSR]
Dead men tell no tales
Taking up only familiar names, we find among shareholders listed as extant on September 2011, Jawaharlal Nehru of Anand Bhawan, Allahabad. Nehru died in 1964. Co-founder Rafi Ahmad Kidwai died in 1954. The 2011 list mentions Feroze Gandhi (died in 1960); Indira Nehru Gandhi (died in 1984); Ghanshyam Das Birla (died in 1983); NS Pandit and Vijaya Lakshmi Pandit (died in 1990); Kailash Nath Katju (died in 1968); Radha Kumud Mukherji; former Chief Justice of India Mirza Hameedullah Beg (died in 1985); Yagya Dutt Sharma (died in 1996); Sucheta Kripalani (died in 1974); Yashpal Kapoor; Mohammed Yunus (died in 2001); BRCC president Rajni Patel; Jitendra Prasad (died in 2001); HY Sharda Prasad (died in 2008); Lalit Suri (died in 2006).
[Sic: Note “…shareholders listed as extant on September 2011…” This suggests that the planning for the swindle was put in place around that time. Incidentally, who represented them at the annual general (body) meeting? Even their corpses could not be present as most of them were cremated. NSR]
Many firms are long extinct. One shareholder, Punjab Pradesh Congress Committee, is possibly not legal as a political party cannot enter into any commercial activity.
The list reflects that from its inception in 1937, Associated Journals did not deem fit to maintain its records properly. When shareholders died, their legal heirs / nominees did not replace them. The same is the case with defunct companies whose promoters and their heirs were entitled to shares of Associated Journals. Keeping defunct shareholders from 1937 to 2011 suggests they comprised a sort of default vote-bank for those controlling the company. The Government would do well to determine the legal heirs of these individuals and entities. [Sic: This I believe is violation of Company Law. NSR]
That this may not have been an accidental omission can be seen from the fact that from time to time members of the Nehru-Gandhi family and their close associates entered the shareholder list — Indira Gandhi and Feroze Gandhi (later their grandchildren). But other offspring [or nominees] did not.
This brings into focus other trusts associated with the family that have come to light during the current controversy. Late Mohammed Yunus’s address (18 Paschim Marg) is also the address of RD Pradhan who runs Rattan Deep Trust from there and serves as its authorised attorney (2008 list). Rahul Gandhi is also authorised attorney of this trust. He is also associated with Janhit Nidhi, a registered public trust at 1/6 INS Building, Rafi Marg, New Delhi.
In September 2011, Rahul Gandhi and Rameshwar Thakur were trustees and authorised attorney of Rattan Deep Trust and Priyanka Gandhi Vadera (spelling as per list) and Rameshwar Thakur were trustees and authorised attorney of Janhit Nidhi. A full disclosure about the mandate and purpose of these trusts and how and why they acquired shares in Associated Journals would be in order.
Editor’s afterword: no Rama Rajya, but Roma Rajya
FOLKS is grateful to Ms Sandhya Jain for her thorough investigation of this sordid affair. This afterword is intended to shed light on the source of the methodology employed in this shenanigan. There is an old saying that “End justifies the means.” It is to the credit of the Italian Mafia that it has eliminated the hypocritical need to justify the means. Its version, now followed by the Gandhi family and the Congress is “End alone matters.” There is no mention of any means, let alone justifying it.
Recognizing this basic fact, that the Congress today is an Italian party governed by the practices of Italian politics than by any Indian mores or principles helps in understanding the workings behind this affair. (There are no mores or principles in Italian politics.) A hundred years ago Sri Aurobindo in his Uttarpara speech may have thundered “Sanatana Dharma alone is for us the nationalism,” but the situation today nothing like it. To understand this it is necessary to have an idea of the Rajadharma in Italy.
Does this mean religion or even dharma has disappeared from Indian politics? Hardly, for religion is not dharma, let alone rajadharma. Only sanatana dharma has been replaced by Mafia dharma. To understand it helps to pay attention to what the former Italian president Francesco Cossiga had to say in a different context. Speaking of the ultimate Italian politician, the then prime minister Giulio Andreotti, but could equally be said of Silvio Berlusconi, Cossiga said: “Andreotti believes in God, the problem is he believes only in God.”
If we replace god by greed, the creed of the Italian Congress become perfectly understandable— as a creed that worships greed. Welcome to the Roma Rajya that India is today.
![Avatar]()
Navaratna Rajaram • 2 years ago Update to the FOLKS column below: misappropriation in MumbaiThe following facts came to light soon after the column went on line."Amid allegations that the Congress party gave an interest-free loan to Associated Journals Ltd with an eye on the company’s real estate assets, it now emerges that the company that
publishes National Herald and Quami Awaz was allotted a prime plot of land by
the government of Maharashtra in suburban Mumbai, ostensibly for a press and a
Nehru memorial library, neither of which was built...." DNA reported on November 5.Activist Anil Galgali, who used the Right to Information Act to obtain
details... has now written to chief minister Prithviraj Chavan demanding that
Associated Journal Ltd’s land be taken back by the government. ...“The plot was
given for daily news publication, a Nehru library and a research centre in 1983
but it is still as it is. The government should take the land back and build a
hostel for students (Scheduled Caste) for which it was originally reserved,”
Galgali’s letter dated November 2 says.“Will you as chief minister be able to initiate proceedings for the state government to reclaim land that is now under the control of Rahul Gandhi? There is a question about this,” Galgali has said in his letter. He goes on to say that the market value of the land is now
about Rs 1,000 crore....Young Indian, which now controls Associated Journals has its eye on the
latter’s considerable real estate assets.Congress president Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi are among the main shareholders of Young Indian.Question: Is what we have seen so far the proverbial tip of the iceberg? Clearly the same modus operandi is being followed to grab valuable property in the name of Nehru Library.
National Herald publisher got plot six months after Hooda government came to power
Written by VARINDER BHATIA | Chandigarh | Updated: December 12, 2015 7:22 am
The property of Associated Journals Ltd in Panchkula.On 3,360 square metres of prime space in Panchkula, opposite the Haryana police headquarters, a swanky four-storey building is waiting for occupants.
This is the property of Associated Journals Ltd (AJL), which got this plot from the previous Congress government, led by Bhupinder Singh Hooda, barely six months after it came to power in Haryana in 2005. At the time, AJL was the publisher of The National Herald newspaper.
On August 14, 2014, two months before the assembly polls, an Occupation Certificate was issued for the four-storey building on the plot, according to records maintained by Haryana Urban Development Authority (HUDA), which allotted the land.
Sector 6 is considered as one of the prime sectors of Panchkula and is home to palatial houses, a government hospital and the offices of HUDA, Haryana State Industries and Infrastructural Development Corporation (HSIIDC), the state marketing board, the forest department, etc.
The AJL plot is categorised as a “government office”, and HUDA records show that the authority had valued the property at Rs 59.3 lakh when it was allotted.
“AJL made an application to the government seeking allotment of the plot and it was allotted to the land by HUDA. All the dues of the plot have been cleared by the allottee — M/s Associated Journals Limited,” a HUDA official, who did not wish to be named, toldThe Indian Express.
This is what HUDA records, examined by The Indian Express, show on the Panchkula plot:
* HUDA allotted the plot C-17, Institutional Area, Sector 6, Panchkula to AJL by way of a “Direct Transfer” on September 28, 2005. The allottee took possession of the property on the same day.
* The allottee’s permanent and temporary address is recorded as “Herald House, 5-A, Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, 110002”.
Incidentally, AJL’s records show that on March 20, 2015, previous CM Bhupinder Singh Hooda’s son Deepender Singh was appointed as Additional Director in the company.
When contacted, Deepender Hooda confirmed that he has been “a director with AJL since 2015”. “Besides and beyond this, I have nothing further to say on this,” the Congress MP from Rohtak told The Indian Express.
The empty plot is now being taken care of by a security guard, Dinesh Singh, who directed queries to “manager S K Sharma in the New Delhi office”.
When The Indian Express contacted Sharma at Herald House in New Delhi, he said, “The building is lying locked. We are going to start our operations from there soon. I do not know the exact details about the operations.”
The acquisition of AJL by Young Indian Pvt Ltd, in which Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi hold 38 per cent shares each, is at the centre of a political storm with a Delhi court summoning both the Congress leaders on December 19.
The court issued the summons on a complaint filed in 2012 by BJP leader Subramanian Swamy, alleging cheating and breach of trust in the acquisition. The Congress leaders have denied the charges.
'Democratic' Sonia Vs 'Dictatorial' Modi
By S Gurumurthy
Published: 10th December 2015 05:24 AM
Last Updated: 10th December 2015 05:24 AM
The Congress party characterises Modi as a dictator and by implication, presents Sonia as a democrat. Whether a popular leader is a dictator or a democrat is tested by conduct. An unpopular dictator is an oxymoron. A dictator may become unpopular but no unpopular person can ever become a dictator. How a leader behaves when in position of power — particularly when his or her position is under threat — offers the most reliable test. A popular Indira Gandhi was tested twice. Once in 1969 when her senior colleagues dissented her individualistic style. She used State power, backstabbed the party and defeated the party nominee in the election for the President of India and captured the party with the help of the enemies of the party by forging an ideological alliance with them. This destroyed the democratic Congress party as the nation knew till then. She put the party under her virtual dictatorship. She changed the very paradigm of national politics from politics of ethics and character to politics of power and success. This brought out her dictatorial mind. The real dictator in her came out when the Allahabad High Court unseated her from Parliament and the Supreme Court made her a Prime Minister without voting rights in Parliament. She struck at the nation, imposed Emergency and, as Nani Palkhiwala said, defaced and defiled the Constitution, courts, Parliament, Opposition, media, and the people at large and put the whole nation under total dictatorship. It is 40 years since and still now, no one in the Congress or from the family of Indira Gandhi has sincerely regretted the Emergency. On the contrary, Rajiv Gandhi, after he got four-fifths majority in the Lok Sabha in 1984, even tried to justify the Emergency. And that Congress party and Sonia Gandhi, claiming to be the proud daughter-in-law of Indira Gandhi, are trying to brand Narendra Modi as dictatorial — by implication, claiming to be democratic. Is it not time then that one compared the democratic credentials of Sonia and Modi?
Look at how the ‘dictatorial’ Narendra Modi conducted himself when, just three years before he became the Prime Minister, he was under tremendous pressure from the Opposition, media and even the courts. Sonia Gandhi and her party had accused him of being the merchant of death. The UPA, which had made the CBI its Alsatian, used the agency to target him in the Sohrabuddin case. The sordid story was exposed by The New Indian Express (see articles titled, Fixing Shah, by Fabrication, CBI Betrays Court, Bails Out Congress and Interrogating The Media — published in August 2010). The media was applauding every effort to fix and get rid of him. Yet, there was no FIR against him. No complaint had been filed in any court against him. No court had issued him summons. No court had ordered his examination by police. But the Special Investigation Team (SIT) on Gujarat riots summoned him for examination like police would summon any one at their discretion. He was as popular in Gujarat as he is now all over the country. He was a powerful and performing Chief Minister of Gujarat. Also he was seen as the rising national leader within the BJP when the SIT summoned him. But he did not use his party to drum up support for him in the Assembly nor did his party stall Parliament. The Gujarat Assembly functioned and so did Parliament. He could have gathered a million people to give him a great ovation when he went to the SIT office to put pressure on the investigation and on the instigators of the case against him. He respected the summons and drove to the SIT office in his car. He walked down the lane leading to the SIT alone. He was grilled by the SIT for over eight hours. He answered their questions. Satisfied with his answers, the SIT finally exonerated him. But his adversaries would not leave him. They charged the SIT with favouring him. Finally, the Supreme Court had to exonerate him twice — once, when the UPA was in power and next time, a few months ago. This is ‘dictatorial’ Modi’s behaviour.
Now compare how the ‘democratic’ Sonia behaved after the National Herald case caught up with her, her son and her family loyalists. Here is the National Herald case in brief. In November 2012, Dr Subramanian Swamy exposed how Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi have grabbed properties of National Herald worth thousands of crores through a convoluted criminal strategy. After that, this newspaper carried a detailed article, National Herald Affair: It’s Fraud All The Way (TNIE, November 8, 2012), explaining the fraud. In January 2013, Dr Swamy filed a criminal complaint against Sonia, her son and family loyalists, including Motilal Vohra, the Congress party treasurer, charging them with conspiracy, fraud, cheating, and criminal breach of trust to rob the shareholders and the public of thousands of crores. All this happened when the UPA was in power. Rahul Gandhi threatened to file a defamation suit against Dr Swamy. Swamy challenged him but Rahul ran away. In June 2014, a Delhi criminal court took cognisance of the offence and issued summons. Forthwith, Sonia Gandhi and other five accused, including Rahul, filed petitions in the Delhi High Court to quash the criminal proceedings. They kept delaying the hearing till they thought they got the judge they felt comfortable with. One judge recused himself and so did the next. The matter went to the third judge, who Sonia and her co-accused did not like, and he too recused himself. All the accused petitioned to have the matter heard by the second judge who had recused himself earlier. The case was posted before the very judge, who Sonia and her co-accused felt comfortable with. It is that very same judge, who decided on December 7, 2015 that the lower court has rightly ordered their trial and summoned them, and asked them to appear before the metropolitan magistrate. Still, hell broke loose. The very next day the Congress president was seen instigating her MPs to stall Parliament. When the Speaker asked them why were they disturbing the House, they shouted they saw in the National Herald case “political vendetta” and “democracy in danger”. When the Speaker asked them to spell out what they want and offered to allow them to raise the issue and speak in the House, they ran away from speaking in the House. Obviously, they only had instructions to stall the House. The same theatrics were repeated in the Rajya Sabha. Not that they did not talk in the House. They couldn’t. Why?
It needs no seer to say that the prosecution on the National Herald fraud was an act of the judiciary and the Modi government had had nothing to do with it. There was no CBI or Income Tax or the Enforcement Directorate in the picture which could link the prosecution to the government. It was the private complaint of Dr Subramanian Swamy on which the magistrate held that Sonia, Rahul and the four family loyalists had created a trust company fully controlled by them as a cloak or sham of a special purpose vehicle to convert public money and to acquire control over thousands of crores of assets of National Herald. The court held that the accused acted as a consortium to achieve the nefarious purpose and asked them to face trial. This was the prima facie assessment of the court under the law. The government had no role in this process at all. It was between Sonia Gandhi and her co-conspirators on the one hand and Dr Subramanian Swamy on the other, with the court playing the neutral and judicial role. This order was passed in June 2014. Did Sonia or Rahul or any of the accused or the Congress party even hint that the magistrate had acted outside the law? Stop Parliament? In contrast, they all went to the Delhi High Court to quash the order and summons of the magistrate. The judge, whom they were comfortable with, decided on December 7 that they better face the criminal case as the magistrate had rightly decided.
The very next day, the ‘democratic Sonia’ ordered her party to stall Parliament. Even as she was overseeing the closure of Parliament for the day on December 8 and her son was on a flying visit to Tamil Nadu to offer relief to the flood-affected people, their lawyers were standing before the magistrate and pleading that Sonia, Rahul and the other accused were “keen to appear before the court”. Where is vendetta then, Madam Sonia? The court has granted them 10 days and directed them to appear on December 19. It remains to be seen whether the ‘democratic’ Sonia and Rahul will walk alone and appear before the court like Modi did before the police or gather a huge crowd for theatrics and disturb the court like the Gandhis disturbed the Shah Commission.
A caveat: Obviously stressed by the court notice on charges of swallowing thousands of crores of properties of National Herald by using the Congress party, Sonia Gandhi said, “Why should I be scared of anyone? I am Indira Gandhi’s daughter-in-law.” She said this after personally directing the Congress party to halt Parliament on Tuesday. This is ‘democratic’ Sonia, the daughter-in-law of Indira Gandhi, the saviour of democracy in India, charging Modi with ‘dictatorship’. There cannot be a more cruel joke on democracy.
The author is a well- known commentator on political and economic issues.
E-mail: guru@gurumurthy.net