New Delhi, Feb 12: In its biggest bank fraud case, the CBI has booked ABG Shipyard Ltd and its former chairman and managing director Rishi Kamlesh Agarwal along with others for allegedly cheating a consortium of banks led by State Bank of India of over Rs 22,842 crore, officials said on Saturday.
Besides Agarwal, the agency has also named the then executive director Santhanam Muthaswamy, directors Ashwini Kumar, Sushil Kumar Agarwal and Ravi Vimal Nevetia and another company ABG International Pvt Ltd for alleged offences of criminal conspiracy, cheating, criminal breach of trust and abuse of official position under the IPC and the Prevention of Corruption Act, they said.
"Searches were conducted on Saturday at 13 locations in the premises of accused including private company, directors at Surat, Bharuch, Mumbai, Pune etc which led to recovery of incriminating documents," CBI said in a statement.
The bank had first filed a complaint on November 8, 2019 on which the CBI had sought some clarifications on March 12, 2020.
The bank filed a fresh complaint in August that year. After "scrutinising" for over one and a half years, the CBI acted on the complaint filing an FIR on February 7.
The company was sanctioned credit facilities from 28 banks and financial institutions led by ICICI Bank with the SBI having exposure of Rs 2468.51 crore, the officials said.
The Forensic Audit by Ernst and Young has shown that between 2012-17, the accused colluded together and committed illegal activities including diversion of funds, misappropriation and criminal breach of trust, they said.
It is the biggest bank fraud case registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).
Funds were used for purposes other than for which they were released by banks, it said.
The loan account was declared as non-performing asset (NPA) in July 2016 and fraud in 2019.
In its complaint, the State Bank of India said ABG Shipyard Ltd (ABGSL) is the flagship company of the ABG Group which engaged in the business of ship building and ship-repair.
The ABGSL being a major player in Indian ship building industry operates from shipvards are located at Dahej and Surat in Gujarat with capacity to build vessels up to 18,000 dead weight tonnage (DWT) at Surat Shipyard and 1,20,000 dead weight tonnage (DWT) at Dahej Shipyard.
The company has constructed over 165 vessels (including 46 for export market) in the last 16 vears including specialized vessels like the newsprint carriers. self-discharging and loading bulk cement carriers, floating cranes etc with class approval of all international classification societies like Lloyds, American Bureau of Shipping. Bureau Veritas, IRS, DNV, the complaint said.
"Global crisis has impacted the shipping industry due to fall in commodity demand and prices and subsequent fall in cargo demand. The cancellation of contracts for few ships and vessels resulted in piling up of inventory. This has resulted in paucity of working capital and caused significant increase in the operating cycle. thereby aggravating the liquidity problem and financial problem," the complaint said.
The SBI said there was no demand of commercial vessels as the industry was going through downturn even in 2015 which was further aggravated due to lack of defence orders making it difficult for the company to maintain repayment schedule, it said.
"The company has been referred to NCLT, Ahmedabad, by ICICI Bank for CIRP," it said.
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.
Gurugram/New Delhi: A case involving a former Ashoka University student has drawn attention after her parents alleged she went missing and sought a probe into an alleged network, while court records indicate that the woman had left home voluntarily and sought legal protection to live independently.
According to The Print, the parents, who are both academics, have approached the Haryana State Commission for Women, alleging that their daughter was manipulated and used by university officials. They have requested a probe by the National probe Agency and have named multiple individuals, including academic members, researchers, and students, in their complaints.
However, the university stated that the woman ceased to be a student in May 2023 and that its instructors and staff have no participation in the situation.
According to documentation in the case, the woman, who was 22 at the time, left her Rohtak home on October 24, 2023. In her written communication with police officers and the station house officer in Sonipat, she stated that she had departed on her own accord, alleging years of physical and emotional abuse at home and demanding secrecy regarding her location.
She subsequently recorded a statement before a magistrate under provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure. She affirmed her decision to live independently and in later complaints, she alleged continued attempts by her family to contact her and sought police protection.
Court records from the Delhi High Court show that she appeared in person before the court in May 2024 and stated that she wished to choose her own way of life and did not want to interact with her family. The court noted her statement and recorded that she was a major acting of her own volition.
In a subsequent order, the court noted that she had been provided police protection since November 2023 and was residing independently, granting her liberty to approach the court again if required.
The parents, meanwhile, have maintained that their daughter was a meritorious student and alleged that she was traced earlier to premises linked to university staff. They also raised concerns over financial transactions and a name change, which they claim point to a larger network.
At the centre of their allegations is Bittu Kaveri Rajaraman, an associate professor at the university. No response has been issued by the individuals named in the complaint so far.
After the matter was taken up by the women’s commission, chairperson Renu Bhatia said the panel may recommend a probe by the Central Bureau of Investigation.
During the hearings, a lawyer claiming to represent the woman arrived before the commission even though she had not been summoned and the commission has asked for her personal appearance.
