Sachin=GOD Posted February 28, 2014 Author Posted February 28, 2014 Hindustan Times @htTweets #Sahara Case | Senior prosecution officer Lucknow, Lallan Yadav, suffers cardiac arrest while pleading case in court, hospitalised #ht
Sachin=GOD Posted February 28, 2014 Author Posted February 28, 2014 Sent to police custody till 4th march.
Sachin=GOD Posted February 28, 2014 Author Posted February 28, 2014 Looks like Jethmalani is the official representative of the who is who of chors. oh yeah....he has been defending famous chors for years now. Check out the "defense of high profile cases" in this page - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ram_Jethmalani
punjabi_khota Posted February 28, 2014 Posted February 28, 2014 Jethmalani sabka baap hai...sab billionaires ko bachane vaala Serving the strong and mighty, since 1900 (or something)
sachin34357 Posted February 28, 2014 Posted February 28, 2014 Looks like Jethmalani is the official representative of the who is who of chors. Ravi Shankar Prasad is also defending him
gattaca Posted February 28, 2014 Posted February 28, 2014 Jethmalani sabka baap hai...sab billionaires ko bachane vaala Serving the strong and mighty, since 1900 (or something) I think he even defended the guys who executed indira gandhi.
velu Posted March 1, 2014 Posted March 1, 2014 I think he even defended the guys who executed indira gandhi. he is true to his profession :giggle:
Raghav_12 Posted March 1, 2014 Posted March 1, 2014 Jethmalani sabka baap hai...sab billionaires ko bachane vaala Serving the strong and mighty, since 1900 (or something) Yes. He is 91 and it is just amazing that he is fully active in his professional life even at this advanced age . Most of the people won't reach that age and even if they do, they would be frail or bed-ridden. But this guy doesn't seem to be stopping.
Sachin=GOD Posted March 4, 2014 Author Posted March 4, 2014 Firstpost @firstpostin Subrata Roy to remain in custody till Sahara comes up with proposal to pay investors All the Sahara Directors except Vandana Bhargava will also be in Police Custody.
sachin34357 Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 thank god he was wearing sun glasses or his court appearance would have had to be postponed
Lord Posted March 4, 2014 Posted March 4, 2014 thank god he was wearing sun glasses or his court appearance would have had to be postponed :omg:
Sachin=GOD Posted March 15, 2014 Author Posted March 15, 2014 Subrata “Sahara” Roy: Victor, villain or victim? Subrata Roy the florid, flashy, brash promoter of the Sahara Group has been in Tihar Jail since March 4, 2014. The crime committed by him baffles most aam admis, including this one. The Supreme Court held way back in 2012 that his companies acted in contravention of the SEBI rules for public issues by unlisted companies. His legal arguments that SEBI has no jurisdiction over unadvertised issuance of Optionally Convertible Debentures by unlisted companies have been rejected by the Supreme Court and he was directed to refund Rs 175 billion (USD 4 billion) collected by his 1.2 million agents from an estimated 22 million small investors between 2008 and 2011. In a more “liberal” environment Roy would be hailed as an innovator par excellence who extended financial inclusion to millions of investors and provided livelihood to over a million agents. Wherein lay his innovation? Quite simply he profited by providing “informal financial services” on top of the wave of public corruption which has conservatively equaled between 2 to 5% of the GDP since the “ go go” years began in the 1990s. His modus operandi is probably simple. He provides a “cloak” of legit financial services to the corrupt public servant and politician by managing the cash generated illegally by them. This “cloak” of financial services is based on a micro-financial network of investors and agents on a staggering scale with around 3000 branches and massive investments in real estate…what else? Similar to any other Ponzi scheme, his trick was to offer huge returns in excess of 25% per year. Ponzi schemes ultimately fail because they run out of new investors to provide the cash flow to service the existing investors because the underlying assets invariably never provide adequate return. This is where Sahara had a winning card. They possibly had access to an inexhaustible source of unaccounted cash coming to them from corrupt public servants and politicians. Forget for the moment, the cash flow available from the film industry, drugs or terrorism. Since Sahara serviced the politically powerful, they were immune from censure. But a more basic reason why Sahara remained below the radar was possibly because they maintained a tight leash on the volume of “real” small time depositors who provided the cloak to “benami” big time investors. It is noteworthy that the Supreme Court wondered how many “real” investors they had. No one knows. But had these small time investors reached a volume where their investments exceeded the illegal cash, the scheme would have imploded. As it happens it never did. It was Securities Exchange Bureau of India (SEBI the David) who slew Sahara (the Goliath). It investigated the retail cash collection done by Sahara agents (Rs 175 billion or around US $ 4 billion) between 2008 and 2011 against the issue of a “hybrid” instrument called Optional Convertible Debenture. It held that this was “akin” to a public issue and hence in their turf. Since Sahara had no approval from SEBI for issuing such “public” securities the cash collection was illegal. What motivated SEBI to wake up? Ostensibly they responded to a complaint by an association of investors. It is not clear if any of them had actually invested in the debentures or were simply being “high minded”. Other reasons could be: (1) the financial regulator fighting for turf with the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, who had approved the issue of debentures under the Companies Act; (2) SEBI’s apprehension that significant domestic savings were being directed away from the bourses where listed companies raise money under SEBI oversight . Between 2008 and 2011 listed companies, in India, raised USD 26 billion as new capital against USD 4 billion raised by Sahara, an unlisted Indian company, (3) as always in India, the possibility of government settling political scores. We await an intrepid investigator to inform us, which of these was the case. But what there are some intriguing aspects to this case: First, why did the dog not bark? Why did no retail investor complain that Sahara had defrauded them? Subrata Roy asserts that not a single investor has been disadvantaged and that all assets are being serviced and redeemed. This seems entirely plausible in the light of the reasoning given above that the “beauty” (as Subrata himself would say) of the scheme lay in completely insulating the retail investors from risk and indeed to molly coddle them with fabulous returns, using the inexhaustible cash flow of the fatter investors. Whilst Subrata is no Robin Hood, his novel method of socializing and distributing the gains from corruption across 30 million investors is unique in its scale . Reliance has had a similar strategy which makes investors forgiving of its poor public image. Dhirubhai, was an early mover in this game. He had an uncanny feel for the pulse of the nation. He was the first to recognize that distributing profits to over 3 million shareholders is a good way of building social capital for a corporate. Subrata has gone much further with 30 million investors, though they are difficult to trace. Second, why is it that the entire government machinery, except SEBI, has remained passive and silent? Why has no action been taken against the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, which since 2008 was sanguine enough about the operations of Sahara to clear their Red Herring Prospectus for collecting cash from investors? Third, why is Subrata Roy in Jail? He is not a criminal. Even if he has committed contempt of the Supreme Court, why has SEBI failed to attach Sahara’s; issue a public notice to ascertain who their investors are and compensate them accordingly, despite being specifically directed by the Supreme Court to do so in 2012? Is this a case of judicial activism where the Supreme Court has stepped in to discharge a public duty which appropriately lies with the executive? If so then why not name and shame those in the executive who have been hand and glove with Sahara? Why is the corruption angle not being investigated by the CBI and the CVC? Arbitrary curtailment of human rights violates the Rule of Law, no matter how high the authority which falls into that trap. Finally why pick only on Subrata Roy. Is he paying solely for the scale of his illegality (Rs 175 billion against Harshad Mehta’s Rs 40 billion); for his flashiness and love of the good life? We aam admis can be forgiven for muddling the offence of corruption with the social opprobrium that an open flouting of the law should attract. But a judicial determination guided by anger at the passivity of the executive, rather than cold, legal logic does not give comfort that India’s system of checks and balances is working. http://ahlu-india.com/2014/03/14/subrata-sahara-roy-victor-villain-or-victim/
Crookbond Posted March 15, 2014 Posted March 15, 2014 Ravi Shankar Prasad is also defending him I think he's one of the legal counsel? In any ways, I expect Roy to be out after we #Vote4India
Sachin=GOD Posted March 26, 2014 Author Posted March 26, 2014 SC grants conditional bail to Sahara chief Subrata Roy NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Wednesday asked Sahara group chief Subrata Roy to deposit Rs 10,000 crore with the market regulator Sebi for his release on interim bail from judicial custody. The apex court bench of Justice KS Radhakrishnan and Justice JS Khehar said that of the Rs 10,000 crore, Rs 5,000 crore would be deposited in cash, and the balance Rs 5,000 crore will be furnished through a bank guarantee. The SC has also agreed to defreeze bank accounts of Sahara companies to raise the Rs 10,000 crore and adjourned the case for tomorrow asking the group to give details of the bank account numbers which are to be defreezed. The court declined to water down its orders as the Sahara group counsel expressed inability to raise such a huge amount while Subrata Roy is in jail. Sahara group on Tuesday had submitted a new proposal for refunding Rs 20,000 crore of investors money before the Supreme Court. Roy was sent to jail on March 4 by the top court in connection with contempt proceedings over two group companies' failure to pay Rs 20,000 crore by way of dues to market regulator Sebi. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/SC-grants-conditional-bail-to-Sahara-chief-Subrata-Roy/articleshow/32719977.cms gotta be the costliest bail in history :cantstop:
SLICKR392 Posted March 26, 2014 Posted March 26, 2014 The Supreme Court on Wednesday asked Sahara group chief Subrata Roy to deposit Rs 10,000 crore with the market regulator Sebi for his release on interim bail from judicial custody. :omg:
velu Posted March 26, 2014 Posted March 26, 2014 anyone ever paid close to 2 billion $s for getting bail ?? :hmmm:
bulbul Posted March 26, 2014 Posted March 26, 2014 I think he's one of the legal counsel? In any ways' date=' I expect Roy to be out after we #Vote4India[/quote'] :phehehe: Hope Kejri breaks silence now.
Khalpat Posted March 27, 2014 Posted March 27, 2014 I read somewhere that he needs to pay Rs 5000 crore in cash :omg: .
Sachin=GOD Posted May 15, 2014 Author Posted May 15, 2014 Sahara: Amid allegations of ‘pressure’, SC judge opts out Justice Khehar also told the Registry that in future, no matter pertaining to any Sahara group company should be placed before a bench of which he is part. ON May 6, the Supreme Court bench of Justice K S Radhakrishnan and Justice Jagdish Singh Khehar pronounced its 207-page judgment turning down the bail plea of Sahara group chief Subrata Roy and its two directors, who are in jail since March 4 for failing to refund investors’ money. The same evening, Justice Khehar sent a note to the Supreme Court Registry directing it not to include him in any new bench — the bench would have to be recast due to Justice Radhakrishnan’s retirement on Thursday — constituted to hear the Sahara case. Justice Khehar also told the Registry that in future, no matter pertaining to any Sahara group company should be placed before a bench of which he is part. Justice Khehar, who is well known for his strong views on judicial propriety and is seen as a future Chief Justice of India, authored the important judgment which has resulted in prolonging Roy’s stay in jail. Sources in the Supreme Court Registry told The Indian Express that Justice Khehar’s note has been placed before Chief Justice of India R M Lodha for appropriate orders. Justice Khehar’s decision to opt out of the case assumes significance in view of the public statement by his colleague on the bench, Justice Radhakrishnan, last week that he faced “pressure, tension and strain” while hearing the Sahara matter. Even the May 6 judgment talks of pressure, pointing to litigants who “derive their strength from abuse of the legal process”. The Bench also came down heavily on what it termed as “calculated psychological offensives and mind games adopted to seek recusal of judges,” which, it said, needed to “be strongly repulsed”. “We deprecate such tactics and commend a similar approach to other courts when they experience such behaviour,” the Bench said. During hearing of the petition, the battery of Sahara lawyers led by senior advocate Ram Jethmalani had made many attempts to get the judges to recuse from the case, with Jethmalani even going to the extent of telling the Bench that hearing the matter would cause “discomfort” and “embarrass” the Bench. In open court, he suggested that the judges should recuse from hearing the case and order it to be heard by another composition, not including either of them. However, the Bench refused to accept this plea, quoting the counsel for the respondents in its judgment as informing them that the “petition was a carefully engineered device, adopted by the petitioner as a stratagem, to seek our withdrawal from the matter”. The judgment also observed, “It seems that our determination to hear the matter marked to us by the Hon’ble Chief Justice was not palatable to some of the learned counsel for the petitioner”. It added that Jethmalani had told the court that it should not hear the matter because “his client” had “apprehensions of prejudice”. “He would, however, not spell out the basis for such apprehension,” the Bench noted. http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-others/sahara-amid-allegations-of-pressure-sc-judge-opts-out/99/ :wall:
Recommended Posts