एचएसबीसी काला धन मामला : केजरीवाल के पक्ष में खुलकर आए आईपीएस अधिकारी अमिताभ

: प्रवर्तन निदेशालय और रिजर्व बैंक से कार्यवाही की मांग : यूपी कैडर के आईपीएस अधिकारी अमिताभ ठाकुर तथा सामाजिक कार्यकर्ता डॉ नूतन ठाकुर ने इंडिया अगेंस्ट करप्शन के अरविन्द केजरीवाल तथा प्रशांत भूषण द्वारा हांगकांग शंघाई कोर्पोरेशन लिमिटेड बैंक (एचएसबीसी) की मदद से काला धन तथा हवाला मार्केट का काम किये जाने के सम्बन्ध लगाए गए आरोपों के सम्बन्ध में प्रवर्तन निदेशालय तथा वित्त मंत्रालय के राजस्व विभाग को एक प्रत्यावेदन भेजा है.

इन दोनों ने कहा है कि इंडिया अगेंस्ट करप्शन के प्रेस नोट में कई सारे ऐसे तथ्य हैं जो प्रथम द्रष्टया प्रेवेंशन ऑफ मनी लॉनडेरिंग एक्ट 2002 (पीएमएलए) की धारा 3 तथा फॉरेन एक्सचेंज मैनेजमेंट एक्ट 1999 (फेमा) की धारा 13 के तहत अपराध जान पड़ते हैं. पीएमएलए की धारा 3  कुछ निश्चित अपराधों  द्वारा प्राप्त काले धन को सफ़ेद और वाजिब धन के रूप में प्रस्तुत किये जाने से सम्बंधित है जबकि फेमा की धारा 13 इस एक्ट के किसी भी प्रावधान के उल्लंघन से संबधित है. पीएमएलए की धारा 8 के अंतर्गत कोई भी शिकायत प्राप्त होने पर यदि निर्णयकर्ता अधिकारी को ऐसा प्रतीत होता है कि इस एक्ट की धारा 3 के अंतर्गत कोई अपराध हुआ है तो वह कार्यवाही प्रारंभ कर सकता है. इसी प्रकार से फेमा की धारा 16 में फेमा के अपराधों के लिए निर्णयकर्ता अधिकारी की नियुक्ति की व्यवस्था है.

अमिताभ और नूतन ने प्रवर्तन निदेशक से अपने प्रत्यावेदन और इसके साथ संलग्न इंडिया अगेंस्ट करप्शन के प्रेस नोट का संज्ञान लेते हुए पीएमएलए तथा फेरा के तहत जांच कर आवश्यक कार्यवाही किये जाने हेतु निवेदन किया है. इसके साथ ही इन दोनों ने भारतीय रिजर्व बैंक के गवर्नर को भी प्रत्यावेदन भेज कर एचएसबीसी पर लगाए गए आरोपों की जांच करने तथा उन आरोपों के सही पाए जाने पर बैंकिंग रेग्युलेशन एक्ट I949 की धारा 22(4) के तहत इस बैंक का लाइसेंस निरस्त करने का निवेदन किया है

अमिताभा ठाकुर और नूतन ठाकुर
अमिताभा ठाकुर और नूतन ठाकुर

नीचे वो पत्र हैं जो इन लोगों ने अलग अलग एजेंसियों के प्रमुखों को अलग अलग विषयों पर लिख भेजा है…

To,

The Director,

Enforcement Directorate

6th Floor , Lok Nayak Bhawan

Khan Market, 

New Delhi – 110 003

Subject- Enquiry and necessary action as regards allegations made by Sri Arvind Kejriwal and Sri Prashant Bhushan of “India Against Corruption” regarding PMLA

Dear Sir,

1. We, petitioners No 1 and 2 introduce ourselves as under-

Petitioner No 1- Amitabh Thakur. son of Sri T N Thakur, resident of 5/426, Viran Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow- 226010 Phone No- 094155-34526, email- amitabhthakurlko@gmail.com, amitabhth@yahoo.com   is an officer of the Indian Police Service, Uttar Pradesh Cadre and is also active as regards issues of transparent and accountable governance. He writes this letter in his personal capacity as a concerned citizen of this Nation

Petitioner No 2- Dr Nutan Thakur, wife of Sri Amitabh Thakur, resident of 5/426, Viran Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow- 226010 Phone No- 094155-34525, email- nutanthakurlko@gmail.com,  is wife of petitioner No 1 and is a social activist and freelance journalist associated with transparency in Governance and Human Right issues

2. That the two petitioners present a very serious matter associated with black money and hawala transactions in assistance with Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Ltd. (HSBC) which has come up in the allegations made by two prominent anti-corruption activists of India, Sri Arvind Kejriwal and Sri Prashant Bhushan of “India Against Corruption”, A-119, First Floor, Kaushambi, Ghaziabad Uttar Pradesh: 201010, Landline Number: 0120-4559701, 4559237, Telefax Number: 0120-2771017,Email: indiaagainstcorruption.2010@gmail.com.

3. That Sri Kejriwal and Sri Bhushan held a Press Conference in New Delhi dated 09/11/2012 where they made some very serious allegations against many persons and the HSBC Bank. They issued a Press note (being attached as Annexure No 1) titled “Is Government encouraging hawala?”

4. That this Press Note focused primarily on the issue of Black money

5. That among other things, they alleged that in July 2011, Indian Government received a list of roughly 700 people having bank accounts in HSBC, Geneva. The list contains bank balances of these people in 2006. They gave the names of the following persons who had black money stashed in Swiss Banks- Mukesh Dhirubhai Ambai –  Rs 100 crores , Anil Dhirubhai Ambani – Rs 100 crores , Motech Software Private Ltd (Reliance Group company) – Rs 2,100 crores , Reliance Industries Ltd – Rs 500 crores , Sandeep Tandon –  Rs 125 crores , Anu Tandon – Rs 125 crores , Kokila Dhirubhai Ambani – She has an account but there was no balance on that date , Naresh Kumar Goyal – Rs 80 crores , Burmans (3 family members) – Rs 25 crores , Yashovardhan Birla – no balance

6. That the Press Note talks of statements of three persons Shri Parminder Singh Kalra

S/o Shri Avtar Singh Kalra, A-29, Friends Colony, New Delhi, Shri Praveen Sawhney

S/o Shri Bhushan Lal Sawhney, 6, Link Road, Jungpura Extn, New Delhi  and Shri Vikram Dhirani

S/o Shri V.K. Dhirani, C-229, Indl. Area, Bulandsahar Road, Ghaziabad, U.P.  (which they have annexed in this Press Note)

7. That the statements by the three gentlemen reveal that through the assistance with HSBC and other banks, there is a brazen and open hawala racket in India. From their statements, it has been alleged that perhaps it is easier to open a Swiss bank account than it is to open an account in SBI, with the assistance of HSBC.

8. That many of the facts Sri Kejriwal and Sri Bhushan have presented in their Press Note prima-facie seem to constitute the offences under The Prevention Of Money-Laundering Act, 2002 (Act 15 Of 2003) (An Act to prevent money-laundering and to provide for confiscation of property derived from, or involved in, money-laundering and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto)

9. That section 2(a) defines "Adjudicating Authority" means an Adjudicating Authority appointed under sub-section (1) of section 6;(e) "banking company" means a banking company or a co-operative bank to which the Banking Regulation Act, 1949 (10 of 1949) applies and includes any bank or banking institution referred to in section 51 of that Act; (k) "Director" or "Additional Director" or "Joint Director" means a Director or Additional Director or Joint Director, as the case may be, appointed under sub-section (1) of section 49;(na) “investigation” includes all the proceedings under this Act conducted by the Director or by an authority authorised by the Central Government under this Act for the collection of evidence; (p) "money-laundering" has the meaning assigned to it in section 3; (u) "proceeds of crime" means any property derived or obtained, directly or indirectly, by any person as a result of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence or the value of any such property;

10. That section 3 says- “ Offence of money-laundering.– Whosoever directly or indirectly attempts to indulge or knowingly assists or knowingly is a party or is actually involved in any process or activity connected with the proceeds of crime and projecting it as untainted property shall be guilty of offence of money laundering.

11. That section 4 says- “Punishment for money-laundering.– Whoever commits the offence of money-laundering shall be punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than three years but which may extend to seven years and shall also be liable to fine which may extend to five lakh rupees: Provided that where the proceeds of crime involved in money-laundering relates to any offence specified under paragraph 2 of Part A of the Schedule, the provisions of this section shall have effect as if for the words "which may extend to seven years", the words "which may extend to ten years" had been substituted.”

12. That section 5 is about Attachment of property involved in money-laundering and says-“ (1) Where the Director, or any other officer not below the rank of Deputy Director authorised by him for the purposes of this section, has reason to believe (the reason for such belief to be recorded in writing), on the basis of material in his possession, that—  (a) any person is in possession of any proceeds of crime; (b) such person has been charged of having committed a scheduled offence; and (c) such proceeds of crime are likely to be concealed, transferred or dealt with in any manner which may result in frustrating any proceedings relating to confiscation of such proceeds of crime under this Chapter, he may, by order in writing, provisionally attach such property for a period not exceeding ninety days from the date of the order

13. That section 7 is related with Adjudicating Authorities, composition, powers, etc. Section 8(1) says- “The Central Government shall, by notification, appoint one or more Adjudicating Authorities to exercise jurisdiction, powers and authority conferred by or under this Act.

14.  That section 8 “Adjudication” says– (1) On receipt of a complaint under sub-section (5) of section 5, or applications made under sub-section (4) of section 17 or under sub-section (10) of section 18, if the Adjudicating Authority has reason to believe that any person has committed an offence under section 3, it may serve a notice of not less than thirty days on such person calling upon him to indicate the sources of his income, earning or assets, out of which or by means of which he has acquired the property attached under sub-section (1) of section 5, or, seized under section 17 or section 18, the evidence on which herelies and other relevant information and particulars, and to show cause why all or any of such properties should not be declared to be the properties involved in money-laundering and confiscated by the Central Government:

15 That section 12 directs Banking companies, financial institutions and intermediaries to maintain records and section 19 is the Power to arrest

16. That the present case seems to be the most fit case for taking action under the various provisions of the PMLA by taking cognizance of the facts presented in the Press Note of Sri Arvind Kejriwal and Sri Prashant Bhushan and by taking suitable further action

17. That hence the two petitioners, in our individual capacities, request you as the competent authority to take cognizance of this representation and the accompanied Annexure (Press Note by Sri Kejriwal and Sri Bhushan) and to act according to the provisions under PMLA to adjudicate as regards the offence alleged to have been committed by the named persons in the Press Note of Sri Arvind Kejriwal and Sri Prashant Bhushan so as to take appropriate actions against the various named persons (Mukesh Dhirubhai Ambai – Rs 100 crores , Anil Dhirubhai Ambani – Rs 100 crores , Motech Software Private Ltd (Reliance Group company) – Rs 2,100 crores , Reliance Industries Ltd – Rs 500 crores , Sandeep Tandon – Rs 125 crores , Anu Tandon – Rs 125 crores , Kokila Dhirubhai Ambani – She has an account but there was no balance on that date , Naresh Kumar Goyal – Rs 80 crores , Burmans (3 family members) – Rs 25 crores , Yashovardhan Birla – no balance) and other persons about whom it is alleged in this Press Note-“ In July 2011, Indian Government received a list of roughly 700 people having bank accounts in HSBC, Geneva. The list contains bank balances of these people in 2006” under the appropriate sections of PML Act, in case they are found guilty in this regard.

18. That with the above facts and circumstances, the two petitioners pray before you to take all possible necessary actions as per the provisions of law (under PMLA) to take suitable actions, in larger public and national interest. The petitioners shall always be willing to support in the investigation/enquiry to the best of their capabilities

Lt No-AT/PMLA/01        

Dated- 10/11/2012

Yours,

1. Amitabh Thakur

2.Nutan Thakur

 Correspondence Address-

 Amitabh Thakur,
 5/426, Viram Khand,
 Gomti Nagar,  
 Lucknow- 226010
 # 94155-34526, 94155-34525
 email- amitabhthakurlko@gmail.com  
        nutanthakurlko@gmail.com

Copy to-
1. The Secretary, Department of Financial Services, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, New Delhi
2. The Principal Secretary, Prime Minister’s Office, Government of India, New Delhi


To,
The Director,
Enforcement Directorate
6th Floor , Lok Nayak Bhawan
Khan Market,  
New Delhi – 110 003

Subject- Enquiry and necessary action as regards allegations made by Sri Arvind Kejriwal and Sri Prashant Bhushan of “India Against Corruption” regarding FEMA
 
Dear Sir,
1. We, petitioners No 1 and 2 introduce ourselves as under-

Petitioner No 1- Amitabh Thakur. son of Sri T N Thakur, resident of 5/426, Viran Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow- 226010 Phone No- 094155-34526, email- amitabhthakurlko@gmail.com, amitabhth@yahoo.com   is an officer of the Indian Police Service, Uttar Pradesh Cadre and is also active as regards issues of transparent and accountable governance. He writes this letter in his personal capacity as a concerned citizen of this Nation
Petitioner No 2- Dr Nutan Thakur, wife of Sri Amitabh Thakur, resident of 5/426, Viran Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow- 226010 Phone No- 094155-34525, email- nutanthakurlko@gmail.com,  is wife of petitioner No 1 and is a social activist and freelance journalist associated with transparency in Governance and Human Right issues
 
2. That the two petitioners present a very serious matter associated with black money and hawala transactions in assistance with Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Ltd. (HSBC) which has come up in the allegations made by two prominent anti-corruption activists of India, Sri Arvind Kejriwal and Sri Prashant Bhushan of “India Against Corruption”, A-119, First Floor, Kaushambi, Ghaziabad Uttar Pradesh: 201010, Landline Number: 0120-4559701, 4559237, Telefax Number: 0120-2771017,Email: indiaagainstcorruption.2010@gmail.com.

3. That Sri Kejriwal and Sri Bhushan held a Press Conference in New Delhi dated 09/11/2012 where they made some very serious allegations against many persons and the HSBC Bank. They issued a Press note (being attached as Annexure No 1) titled “Is Government encouraging hawala?”

4. That this Press Note focused primarily on the issue of Black money

5. That among other things, they alleged that in July 2011, Indian Government received a list of roughly 700 people having bank accounts in HSBC, Geneva. The list contains bank balances of these people in 2006. They gave the names of the following persons who had black money stashed in Swiss Banks- Mukesh Dhirubhai Ambai –  Rs 100 crores , Anil Dhirubhai Ambani – Rs 100 crores , Motech Software Private Ltd (Reliance Group company) – Rs 2,100 crores , Reliance Industries Ltd – Rs 500 crores , Sandeep Tandon –  Rs 125 crores , Anu Tandon – Rs 125 crores , Kokila Dhirubhai Ambani – She has an account but there was no balance on that date , Naresh Kumar Goyal – Rs 80 crores , Burmans (3 family members) – Rs 25 crores , Yashovardhan Birla – no balance

6. That the Press Note talks of statements of three persons Shri Parminder Singh Kalra

S/o Shri Avtar Singh Kalra, A-29, Friends Colony, New Delhi, Shri Praveen Sawhney

S/o Shri Bhushan Lal Sawhney, 6, Link Road, Jungpura Extn, New Delhi  and Shri Vikram Dhirani

S/o Shri V.K. Dhirani, C-229, Indl. Area, Bulandsahar Road, Ghaziabad, U.P.  (which they have annexed in this Press Note)

7. That the statements by the three gentlemen reveal that through the assistance with HSBC and other banks, there is a brazen and open hawala racket in India. From their statements, it has been alleged that perhaps it is easier to open a Swiss bank account than it is to open an account in SBI, with the assistance of HSBC.

8. That many of the facts Sri Kejriwal and Sri Bhushan have presented in their Press Note prima-facie seem to constitute the offences under Foreign Exchange Management Act,  1999 (ACT NO. 42 OF 1999) – An Act to consolidate and amend the law relating to foreign exchange with the objective of facilitating external trade and payments and for promoting the orderly development and maintenance of foreign exchange market in India.

9. That this Act in section 2 talks of " Director of Enforcement" appointed under sub- section (1) of section 36; " foreign currency" means any currency other than Indian currency; " foreign exchange" means foreign currency

10. That section 3 “Dealing in foreign exchange, etc” says that “Save as otherwise provided in this Act, rules or regulations made thereunder, or with the general or special permission of the Reserve Bank, no person shall- (a) deal in or transfer any foreign exchange or foreign security to any person not being an authorized person; (b) make any payment to or for the credit of any person resident outside India in any manner;  (c) receive otherwise through an authorized person, any payment by order or on behalf of any person resident outside India in any manner. Explanation.- For the purpose of this clause, where any person in, or resident in, India receives any payment by order or on behalf of any person resident outside India through any other person (including an authorized person) without a corresponding inwa d remittance from any place outside India, then, such person shall be deemed to have received such payment otherwise than through an authorized person; (d) enter into any financial transaction in India as consideration for or in association with acquisition or creation or transfer of a right to acquire, any asset outside India by any person. Explanation.- For the purpose of this clause," financial transaction" means making any payment to, or for the credit of any person, or receiving any payment for, by order or on behalf of any person, or drawing, issuing or negotiating any bill of exchange r promissory note, or transferring any security or acknowledging any debt.”

11. That similarly, section 4 (Holding of foreign exchange, etc.) says- “- Save as otherwise provided in this Act, no person resident in India shall acquire, hold, own, possess or transfer any foreign exchange, foreign security or any immovable property situated outside India.”

12. That under section 13 Penalties is said- “(1) If any person contravenes any provision of this Act, or contravenes any rule, regulation, notification, direction or order issued in exercise of the powers under this Act, or contravenes any condition subject to which an authorization issued by the Reserve Bank, he shall, upon adjudication, be liable to a penalty up to thrice the sum involved in such contravention where such amount is quantifiable, or up to two lakh rupees where the amount is not quantifiable, and where such contravention is a continuing one, further penalty which may extend to five thousand rupees for every day after the first day during which the contravention continues.”

13. That section 16 is related with Appointment of Adjudicating Authority and says- “(1) For the purpose of adjudication under section 13, the Central Government may, by an order published in the Official Gazette, appoint as many officers of the Central Government as it may think fit, as the Adj dicating Authorities for holding an inquiry in the manner prescribed after giving the person alleged to have committed contravention under section 13, against whom a complaint has been made under sub- section (3) (hereinafter in this section referred to a the said person) a reasonable opportunity of being heard for the purpose of imposing any penalty: Provided that where the Adjudicating Authority is of opinion that the said person is likely to abscond or is likely to evade in any manner, the payment of penalty, if levied, it may direct the said person to furnish a bond or guarantee for such amount an subject to such conditions as it may deem fit.  (2) The Central Government shall, while appointing the Adjudicating Authorities under sub- section (1), also specify in the order published in the Official Gazette, their respective jurisdictions. (3) No Adjudicating Authority shall hold an enquiry under sub- section (1) except upon a complaint in writing made by any officer authorised by a general or special order by the Central Government.

14. That under section 36, Directorate of Enforcement is established with a Director and such other officers or class of officers as it thinks fit, who shall be called officers of Enforcement, for the purposes of this Act.

15. That the present case seems to be the most fit case for taking action under the various provisions of the FEMA. 1949 by appointing an Adjudicating Authority under section 16 to adjudicate as regards the offence alleged to have been committed under section 13 of this Act by the named persons in the Press Note of Sri Arvind Kejriwal and Sri Prashant Bhushan.

16. That hence the two petitioners request you, in their individual capacity, as the competent authority to take cognizance of this representation and the accompanied Annexure (Press Note by Sri Kejriwal and Sri Bhushan) to order appointment of an Adjudicating Authority under section 16 as per the provisions of this Act to adjudicate as regards the offence alleged to have been committed under section 13 of this Act by the named persons in the Press Note of Sri Arvind Kejriwal and Sri Prashant Bhushan so as to take appropriate actions against the various named persons (Mukesh Dhirubhai Ambai – Rs 100 crores , Anil Dhirubhai Ambani – Rs 100 crores , Motech Software Private Ltd (Reliance Group company) – Rs 2,100 crores , Reliance Industries Ltd – Rs 500 crores , Sandeep Tandon – Rs 125 crores , Anu Tandon – Rs 125 crores , Kokila Dhirubhai Ambani – She has an account but there was no balance on that date , Naresh Kumar Goyal – Rs 80 crores , Burmans (3 family members) – Rs 25 crores , Yashovardhan Birla – no balance) and other persons about whom it is alleged in this Press Note-“ In July 2011, Indian Government received a list of roughly 700 people having bank accounts in HSBC, Geneva. The list contains bank balances of these people in 2006”, in case they are found guilty as being alleged in the Press Note

17. That with the above facts and circumstances, the two petitioners pray before you to take all possible necessary actions as per the provisions of law (under FEMA) to take suitable actions, in larger public and national interest. The petitioners shall always be willing to support in the investigation/enquiry to the best of their capabilities.

Lt No-AT/FEMA/01
Dated- 10/11/2012

Yours,

1. Amitabh Thakur

2.Nutan Thakur

Correspondence Address-

         Amitabh Thakur,
        5/426, Viram Khand,
        Gomti Nagar,  
        Lucknow- 226010
        # 94155-34526, 94155-34525
        email- amitabhthakurlko@gmail.com  
        nutanthakurlko@gmail.com

Copy to-

1. The Secretary, Department of Financial Services, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, New Delhi
2. The Principal Secretary, Prime Minister’s Office, Government of India, New Delhi
 


To,
The Governor,
Reserve Bank of India
Plot No. 3, Sector 10,
H.H.Nirmaladevi Marg
Cbd, Belapur, Navi Mumbai 400 614,  
Bandra (East),  
Mumbai 400051

Subject- Enquiry and necessary action as regards allegations made by Sri Arvind Kejriwal and Sri Prashant Bhushan of “India Against Corruption” against Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Ltd. (HSBC)
 
Dear Sir,
1. We, petitioners No 1 and 2 introduce ourselves as under-

Petitioner No 1- Amitabh Thakur. son of Sri T N Thakur, resident of 5/426, Viran Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow- 226010 Phone No- 094155-34526, email- amitabhthakurlko@gmail.com, amitabhth@yahoo.com   is an officer of the Indian Police Service, Uttar Pradesh Cadre and is also active as regards issues of transparent and accountable governance. He writes this letter in his personal capacity as a concerned citizen of this Nation
Petitioner No 2- Dr Nutan Thakur, wife of Sri Amitabh Thakur, resident of 5/426, Viran Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow- 226010 Phone No- 094155-34525, email- nutanthakurlko@gmail.com,  is wife of petitioner No 1 and is a social activist and freelance journalist associated with transparency in Governance and Human Right issues
 
2. That the two petitioners present a very serious matter associated with Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Ltd. (HSBC) which has come up in the allegations made by two prominent anti-corruption activists of India, Sri Arvind Kejriwal and Sri Prashant Bhushan of “India Against Corruption”, A-119, First Floor, Kaushambi, Ghaziabad Uttar Pradesh: 201010, Landline Number: 0120-4559701, 4559237, Telefax Number: 0120-2771017,Email: indiaagainstcorruption.2010@gmail.com.

3. That Sri Kejriwal and Sri Bhushan held a Press Conference in New Delhi dated 09/11/2012 where they made some very serious allegations against the HSBC Bank. They issued a Press note (being attached as Annexure No 1) titled “Is Government encouraging hawala?”

4. That this Press Note focused primarily on the issue of Black money

5. That among other things, they alleged that in July 2011, Indian Government received a list of roughly 700 people having bank accounts in HSBC, Geneva. The list contains bank balances of these people in 2006. They gave the names of the following persons who had black money stashed in Swiss Banks- Mukesh Dhirubhai Ambai –  Rs 100 crores , Anil Dhirubhai Ambani – Rs 100 crores , Motech Software Private Ltd (Reliance Group company) – Rs 2,100 crores , Reliance Industries Ltd – Rs 500 crores , Sandeep Tandon –  Rs 125 crores , Anu Tandon – Rs 125 crores , Kokila Dhirubhai Ambani – She has an account but there was no balance on that date , Naresh Kumar Goyal – Rs 80 crores , Burmans (3 family members) – Rs 25 crores , Yashovardhan Birla – no balance

6. That the Press Note talks of statements of three persons Shri Parminder Singh Kalra

S/o Shri Avtar Singh Kalra, A-29, Friends Colony, New Delhi, Shri Praveen Sawhney

S/o Shri Bhushan Lal Sawhney, 6, Link Road, Jungpura Extn, New Delhi  and Shri Vikram Dhirani

S/o Shri V.K. Dhirani, C-229, Indl. Area, Bulandsahar Road, Ghaziabad, U.P.  (which they have annexed in this Press Note)

7. That the statements by the three gentlemen reveal that HSBC is openly and brazenly running a hawala racket in India. From their statements, it has been alleged that perhaps it is easier to open a Swiss bank account than it is to open an account in SBI, with the assistance of HSBC.

8. That this certainly seems to constitute the serious crime under FEMA and Prevention of Money Laundering Act.

9. That the above-mentioned three gentlemen admitted that they indulged in hawala activities. It also clearly shows that HSBC bank is openly indulging in hawala activities.

10. That Sri Kejriwal and Sri Bhushan have alleged that in October 2011, a report was sent by Director of Investigations, Delhi to Director General of Investigations, Delhi clearly stated that HSBC officials were indulging in hawala and also encouraging tax evasion in India. The report also said that HSBC, Dubai and Geneva do not have a license from RBI to conduct banking operations in India and their operations in India were completely illegal and it is more than a year, yet no action has been taken against HSBC.

11. That it is well known that there is The Banking Regulations Act, I949 (ACT No.10 OF 1949) in India which is “An Act to consolidate and amend the law relating to banking companies”

12. That section 22 of this Act is related with Licensing of banking companies. Section 22(1) says- (1) Save as hereinafter provided, no company shall carry on banking business in India unless it holds a licence issued in that behalf by the Reserve Bank and any such licence may be issued subject of such conditions as the Reserve Bank may think fit to impose.”

13.  That section 22(3) requires that before granting any licence under this section, the Reserve Banking may require to be satisfied by an inspection of the books of the company or otherwise that the among others, the following conditions are fulfilled, namely : —(b) that the affairs of the company are not being, or are not likely to be, conducted in a manner deterimental to the interests of its present or future depositors;  (c) that the general character of the proposed management of the company will not be prejudicial to the public interest or the interest of its depositors;  (e) that the public interest will be served by the grant of a licence to the company to carry on banking business in India;  (g) any other condition, the fulfilment of which would, in the opinion of the Reserve Bank, be necessary to ensure that the carrying on of banking business in India by the company will not be prejudicial to the public interest or the interests of the depositors

14. That section 22(4) says that the Reserve Bank may cancel a licence granted to a banking company under this section — (i) if the company ceases to carry on banking business in India; or(ii) if the company at any time fails to comply with any of the conditions imposed upon it under sub-section (1); or (iii) if at any time, any of the conditions referred to in sub-section (3) and sub-section (3A) is not fulfilled:

Provided that before cancelling a licence under clause (ii) or clause (iii) of this sub-section on the ground that the banking company has failed to comply with or has failed to fulfil any of the conditions referred to therein, the Reserve Bank, unless it is of opinion that the delay will be prejudicial to the interests of the company's depositors or the public, shall grant to the company on such terms as it may specify, an opportunity of taking the necessary steps for complying with or fulfilling such condition.

15. That the present case prima-facie seems to be the most fit case for taking action under section 22(4) of the Banking regulations Act 1949

16. That hence the two petitioners request you as the Governor of the Reserve Bank of India to take cognizance of this representation and the accompanied Annexure (Press Note by Sri Kejriwal and Sri Bhushan) to enquire into the matter immediately and to cancel the licence granted to Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation Ltd. 52/60, M.G.Road, P.O.Box. 128, Mumbai-400 001 ([placed at Serial No 22 of the list of Financial Intermediaries Private-Foreign Banks granted licence, as per the RBI website page- http://www.rbi.org.in/commonman/English/Scripts/BanksInIndia.aspx#FB , in case the allegations as contained in the annexed Press Note are found to be true

17. That with the above facts and circumstances, the two petitioners pray before you, in their individual capacity, to take all possible necessary actions as per the provisions of law, in larger public and national interest. The petitioners shall always be willing to support in the investigation/enquiry to the best of their capabilities

Lt No-AT/HSBC/01

Dated- 10/11/2012

Yours

1. Amitabh Thakur

2.Nutan Thakur

Correspondence Address-

         Amitabh Thakur,
        5/426, Viram Khand,
        Gomti Nagar,  
        Lucknow- 226010
        # 94155-34526, 94155-34525
        email- amitabhthakurlko@gmail.com  
        nutanthakurlko@gmail.com

Copy to-
1. The Secretary, Department of Financial Services, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, New Delhi
2. The Principal Secretary, Prime Minister’s Office, Government of India, New Delhi


 Index

Item Page No

Press note 2

Summary of statements 5

Statement of Parminder Singh Kalra 7

Statement of Vikram Dhirani 21

Statement of Praveen Sawhney 39

Media release – what did US do in similar situation 612

Press note

Is Government encouraging hawala?

The present CBI Director once said that more than $ 500 billion of Indian black money was stashed abroad. A major chunk of this money is believed to be lying in Swiss banks in Switzerland. Would this money every come back to India? Developments of the last few years have given a ray of hope that if Indian Government acted tough like its US counterpart did a few years back, India also might get access to the list of those having their undeclared accounts abroad. However, Indian government seems to be more interested in helping the guilty rather than punishing them.

In July 2011, Indian Government received a list of roughly 700 people having bank accounts in HSBC, Geneva. The list contains bank balances of these people in 2006. We could not access all the names but the following names do appear in that list:

Mukesh Dhirubhai Ambai – Rs 100 crores

Anil Dhirubhai Ambani – Rs 100 crores

Motech Software Private Ltd (Reliance Group company) – Rs 2,100 crores

Reliance Industries Ltd – Rs 500 crores

Sandeep Tandon – Rs 125 crores

Anu Tandon – Rs 125 crores

Kokila Dhirubhai Ambani – She has an account but there was no balance on that date

Naresh Kumar Goyal – Rs 80 crores

Burmans (3 family members) – Rs 25 crores

Yashovardhan Birla – no balance

On receiving this list in July 2011, immediately, Income Tax department started conducting raids. Three raids were conducted on 28th July 2011 in Delhi. Statements (attached herewith) of those raided were recorded under oath, in which they admitted to the genuineness of the information. The three gentlemen admitted that they had Swiss bank accounts, which had not been declared for taxation. Their statements and summaries of their statements are attached. 3 Therefore, if the information about these three is correct, one could reasonably assume that the information about others would also be correct.

We understand that Ambani brothers have admitted to these accounts and have paid taxes on the amounts that exist in their personal names.

But the bigger question is – why were people with small amounts raided by income tax department and those with much bigger amounts not raided?

Mr Mukesh Ambani is understood to have met the then FM, Mr Pranab Mukherjee and requested him not to raid Reliance Industries and that he was willing to pay up taxes to “buy peace”.

It is also understood that Sh Pranab Mukherjee was planning to bring a Voluntary Disclosure of Income Scheme (VDIS) to help these 700 people. Later, he dropped the idea. Rather than do it formally through a VDIS, Mr Mukherjee granted immunity from prosecution under Income tax Act, according to some media reports. All these people were let off after paying income tax only.

Hawala racket:

The statements by the three gentlemen reveal that HSBC is openly and brazenly running a hawala racket in India. From their statements, it appears that perhaps it is easier to open a Swiss bank account than it is to open an account in SBI. You just need to contact HSBC in India. They would send someone at your home, who would get forms filled up, take money in cash from you and your account would get opened in Geneva or Dubai. You don’t need to go out of India to open an account. Likewise, you don’t need to visit abroad to operate your account. You are given the name and mobile no of someone in Geneva. If you have to deposit cash or withdraw money, you just call up that person. Immediately someone in India from HSBC would visit your house. If you have to deposit cash, you hand over the cash to that person. Corresponding amount in dollars would get credited to your account in Switzerland. If you have to withdraw money, that person would deliver that much cash to you.

This is called “hawala”. This is a serious crime under FEMA and Prevention of Money Laundering Act. The three gentlemen admitted that they indulged in hawala activities. It also clearly shows that HSBC bank is openly indulging in hawala activities.

Involvement of the three gentlemen in hawala could be established only when they were raided and their statements recorded.

Why were Ambanis, Naresh Goyal, Burmans and Birlas not raided? Why were their statements not recorded? It appears that small people in that list were raided and bigger and powerful people were let off.

How did the money lying in their Swiss accounts reach there? How did the money travel to and from these accounts regularly? Through hawala, as it is turning out in all other cases?

Are Ambani brothers, Naresh Goyal, Burmans and Birlas guilty of indulging in hawala activities?  
That transactions took place from these bank accounts? Were any bribes paid to politicians or bureaucrats?

In October 2011, a report was sent by Director of Investigations, Delhi to Director General of Investigations, Delhi. The report clearly stated that HSBC officials were indulging in hawala and also encouraging tax evasion in India. The report also said that HSBC, Dubai and Geneva do not have a license from RBI to conduct banking operations in India and their operations in India were completely illegal. It is more than a year, yet no action has been taken against HSBC.

Some Swiss banks were caught indulging in similar illegal activities in US. US government initiated strong action against their top executives and forced them to reveal the complete list of US accountholders in their Swiss branches.

Will Indian Government ever do that?

We demand that:

1. Top officials of HSBC should be immediately arrested under Prevention of Money Laundering Act. Is this not a fit case for charging them against sedition and raging war against India?

2. Operations of HSBC should immediately be suspended in India.

3. Like it was done by US, HSBC should be asked to provide complete list and bank statements of all Indians who have had their accounts in its Geneva branch in last ten years.

4. All those whose names figure in the list of 700 people, including Ambani brothers, Naresh Goyal, Burmans and Birlas should be raided and their statements recorded.

5. They should be asked to produce complete bank statement. They should be asked to explain each entry – both debit and credit. Where did the money come from, how did it come and to whom was money paid and for what. Accordingly, action should be initiated against all of them under various laws.

6. They should be arrested if they are found prima facie guilty to have sent their money abroad through hawala and if they are prima facie guilty under PMLA or PCA.

5

Summary of the three attached statements

Shri Parminder Singh Kalra

S/o Shri Avtar Singh Kalra, A-29, Friends Colony, New Delhi.

In his statement, Shri Kalra stated that he opened an account in HSBC, Zurich on 29.1.2001. He mentioned that he was introduced to the bank by Mr Charles Habnumch, investment consultant based in Zurich. He stated that the deposits in the bank account of around Rs.8-9 crores were not disclosed to the Income tax authorities in India. Shri Kalra mentioned that after opening the account, he gave cash to some person in India as instructed by Mr Charles for being deposited in his account in HSBC, Zurich. He stated that he gave the money in several installments in Delhi to certain persons as instructed by Mr Charles. Shri Kalra stated that different persons came from time to time to collect cash from him. Shri Kalra stated that sometimes in 2008 or 2009, he instructed Mr Charles to close the account. Money of about Rs.8 to 9 crores was delivered to Shri Kalra at Delhi in cash by several persons from time to time as per instructions of Mr Charles. He mentioned that the telephone number of Mr Charles in Zurich is +41-794203575.

Statement of Shri Kalra very clearly establishes that the bank officials are providing illegal channels for transfer of cash from their client account holder in Delhi to Zurich and subsequently are also instrumental in delivering cash withdrawn by the account holder from Zurich to Delhi.

Shri Praveen Sawhney

S/o Shri Bhushan Lal Sawhney, 6, Link Road, Jungpura Extn, New Delhi.

In the statement, Sh. Praveen Sawhney stated that he opened an account in HSBC, Geneva in 2004 and that his father Shri Bhushan Lal Sawhney transferred an amount of US $ 1.8 million to his account. Shri Praveen Sawhney accepted that he withdrew amounts from this account from time to time and as of now $ 4000 to 5000 might to remaining as balance. Regarding the modus operandi of withdrawal of money, Shri Sawhney stated that he used to call the bank officials at Geneva for making withdrawal. HSBC, Geneva used to arrange for delivery of cash in India through their agents in hawala channel. All discussions with the bank officials used to take place telephonically. He stated that he used to contact the following persons in HSBC, Geneva – S.No.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *