False claims about former NDTV director Prannoy Roy’s ‘real identity’ as a Muslim resurface
Fact check by BOOM found that the CBI’s press release from 2017 does not mention Prannoy Roy’s full name, his father’s name, or his birthplace.
CLAIM: CBI has revealed secrets about Prannoy Roy, including his real name as Parvez Raja, born in Karachi, and NDTV’s full form as “Nawajud Din Taufiq Venture.
FACT CHECK: BOOM found that these claims about the CBI raid on Prannoy Roy are false and have been circulating since 2017. CBI's press note does not mention Prannoy Roy’s real name, his father’s name or his birthplace.
New Delhi: A viral social media post claims that during a 2017 CBI raid on former NDTV director and promoter Prannoy Roy, it was "revealed" that his real name was allegedly 'Parvez Raja' and that he was born in Karachi, Pakistan.
2017 CBI case against Prannoy Roy and Radhika Roy
The CBI on October 1, 2024, had submitted a closure report in a Delhi court in a case alleging cheating against former NDTV promoters and directors Prannoy Roy and Radhika Roy stating that there was "insufficient legally admissible evidence". The 2017 case was regarding Rs 48 crore loss suffered by ICICI Bank during a loan settlement in 2009.
Posts viral with false claims about Prannoy Roy
Posts are being shared on Facebook claiming that NDTV’s full form is actually ‘Nawajud Din Taufiq Venture’ and alleging that it is also the ‘real’ name of Prannoy Roy’s father. The posts further claim that Roy’s wife Radhika's ‘real name’ is Rahila and that the CBI found a dartboard with Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s face in Roy’s bedroom.
These claims are being shared on Facebook with a photo of the couple.
Fact-Check: 2017 CBI press note about raid on Prannoy Roy does not mention details claimed in viral post
BOOM found that the claims made in the viral post about the 2017 CBI raid on Prannoy Roy are false.
What does the 2017 CBI Press note mention?
We checked CBI’s official website and found a press release from June 6, 2017, detailing the searches conducted at Roy’s residence.
However, the release did not mention any of the claims made in the viral post, such as Prannoy Roy’s real name, his father’s name, his birthplace, or the original full form of NDTV.
“Reports in sections of the media have raised certain issues and the statement issued by NDTV has leveled certain allegations against the CBI investigation in the case relating to the promoters of NDTV and others. It is clarified that searches have been carried out at the premises of the promoters and their offices based on search warrants issued by the Competent Court. CBI has not conducted any search of the registered office of NDTV, media studio, news room or premises connected with media operations. CBI fully respects the freedom of press and is committed to the free functioning of news operations,” the press note stated.
In June 2017, the CBI had raided several residences and offices connected to Prannoy and Radhika Roy. The raids were in connection with an alleged loss of around Rs. 50 crores caused to ICICI Bank by NDTV.
In 2008, ICICI Bank gave a ₹375 crore loan to the NDTV promoters, using their 61% shareholding in NDTV as collateral. It was alleged that the bank later allowed them to repay the loan at a much lower interest rate (reduced from 19% to 9.5%), as per news reports. This reduction allegedly caused a ₹48 crore loss to ICICI Bank and benefited the promoters. The CBI looked into these claims, filed as a case in 2017 based on a complaint by Sanjay Dutt of Quantum Securities Ltd.
However, in November 2024, CBI closed the case on finding no wrongdoing by ICICI officials. Their closure report concluded that it was a standard transaction and there was no violation of law or criminal conspiracy involved.
Similar false claims on Roy viral in 2017
BOOM had debunked similar false claims that were circulating on WhatsApp about Roy's religion after the CBI raid at his residence in 2017.
The WhatsApp forwards had falsely claimed that Roy, born to a Bengali Hindu father and an Irish mother, was a member of the Redemption Cathedral in New Delhi. However, the office of The Cathedral Church of the Redemption had firmly denied these claims, stating that Roy was not a member.
(This story was originally published by boom, and republished by english.varthabharati.in as part of the Shakti Collective)
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Lakhimpur Kheri violence case: SC expresses disappointment over non-production of witnesses in trial
New Delhi (PTI): The Supreme Court on Friday expressed disappointment over the non-production of witnesses in the ongoing trial against Ashish Mishra, son of former Union minister Ajay Mishra, and others in the 2021 Lakhimpur Kheri violence case.
A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said the status report filed before it by the Uttar Pradesh government has not assigned any reason whatsoever for the non-production of witnesses.
It noted that no witnesses have been examined in the trial for the last two months.
"We direct the presiding judge to take lawful measures to secure the presence of witnesses," the bench said.
It asked the trial judge to make an endeavour to conclude the trial in a time-bound manner, and also to file a status report before it.
The trials in two cases related to the incident are going on before a court in Uttar Pradesh.
The bench noted that in the first case, out of 131 witnesses to be examined, 44 have been examined, 15 have been discharged and 72 are still to be produced.
In the second FIR, out of 35 witnesses, 26 have been examined and nine were left, it said.
Senior advocate Siddharth Dave, appearing for Ashish Mishra, said that as per the latest status report filed by Uttar Pradesh, 44 witnesses have been examined so far in the first FIR.
"No witnesses have been examined in the last two months," Dave said.
He argued that the last status report filed by the state in March also said that 44 witnesses had been examined.
"What have you done from March till today?" the bench asked the counsel appearing for Uttar Pradesh.
The state's counsel said that 3-4 witnesses were summoned for the recording of their deposition during the trial.
The bench said at least 7-8 witnesses should be summoned instead of three or four for a day, so that even if some of them do not turn up, the trial court could proceed with the recording of statements of those appearing before it.
The top court also wondered how official witnesses can remain absent during the trial.
"We are disappointed to note that the so-called status report does not assign any reason whatsoever for non-production of witnesses...," the bench said.
Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the relatives of the farmers who were allegedly mowed down in the incident, said the apex court will have to do something regarding the manner in which the trial was going on.
The bench noted that besides the two FIRs, another FIR was registered in October last year concerning alleged witness intimidation.
It said that, as per the state's status report, the chargesheet was filed against the main accused in that case.
The bench noted that the status report reveals that, as far as Ashish Mishra is concerned, his alleged role in the third case is still being investigated.
The top court directed the investigating officer of the third case to conclude the pending probe and ensure that the appropriate report is filed before the concerned court within four weeks.
The bench posted the next hearing in the Lakhimpur Kheri violence case for July.
On October 3, 2021, eight people, including four farmers, were killed in Tikunia in Lakhimpur Kheri district during a protest by farmers against Deputy Chief Minister Keshav Prasad Maurya's visit to the area.
Four farmers were mowed down by a sports utility vehicle. A driver and two BJP workers were then allegedly lynched by angry farmers. A journalist also died in the violence.
In one of the cases, the trial court in December 2023 framed charges against Mishra and 12 others for alleged murder, criminal conspiracy and under other penal laws in the case of the farmers' deaths, paving the way for the trial.
