Category Archives: Sonia = corruption

Vadra falsified documents to collect premium — Khemka. SoniaG should write to PM the way she batted for Durga Shakti.

Published: August 10, 2013 03:27 IST | Updated: August 10, 2013 03:27 IST

Ousted after probing Vadra land deal, Khemka digs deeper

    Chander Suta Dogra
    Shalini Singh

Working largely on his own in order to rebut the Haryana government’s charge of having acted improperly in ordering the cancellation of the Robert Vadra-DLF land deal, senior IAS officer Ashok Khemka has sought to reconstruct the precise manner in which the controversial property transaction was put together.
Mr. Khemka was Director General, Land Holdings and Land Records and Inspector General of Registration, Haryana, in October 2012 when he decided to set aside the mutation of Mr. Vadra’s property giving effect to the sale deed in favour of DLF. Mr. Khemka’s decision came in the wake of an inquiry he conducted following the publication of a story, ‘Behind Robert Vadra’s fortunes, a maze of questions,’ in The Hindu on October 8, 2012,
Even as he was completing his probe, he was summarily transferred out of the crucial post. A Haryana government committee subsequently indicted him for acting wrongly in the Vadra case. In a tough and detailed counter, Mr. Khemka has listed out a number of irregularities and illegalities involving the Vadra-DLF deal.
The Corporation Bank cheque bearing number 607251 for Rs 7.5 crores, mentioned in sale deed no. 4928 of 12 February 2008, did not belong to Robert Vadra’s company, Skylight Hospitality. It is “likely that a fictitious cheque number was shown by the company with the full consent and knowledge of DLF to enable it to get legal title of land,” Mr. Khemka states in his submission to the Haryana government. This, because at the time of registering the sale deed, Skylight Hospitality did not have the money in its accounts to pay the Rs. 7.95 crores needed for land cost and stamp duty on the deed. Because no money changed hands as stated in the registered sale deed, and the stamp duty of Rs. 45 lakhs was also paid by Onkareshwar Properties and not Mr. Vadra’s company as stated in the deed, this amounts to making false statements punishable under Section 82 of the Registration Act, he states.
Consequently, in the balance sheets filed by the company as on March 31 2008, the bank balance is wrongly shown as a book overdraft of Rs. 7,94,00,000, because the cheque for Rs. 7.5 crores was never presented, says he.
Within two months of this, Mr. Vadra had entered into an agreement to sell the land to DLF for Rs. 58 crores and began receiving the money in instalments, as advance. The first of these instalments came in June 2008 and Mr. Khemka states that “The payment to Onkareshwar Properties was made from the advance money that was received from DLF Universal.” In other words, Mr. Vadra’s company began receiving money into its accounts without investing any of its own funds to buy the land.
Mr. Khemka goes on to say that the DTCP issued the company an LoI for a colony licence, without verifying the genuineness of the sale transactions or the capacity of Skylight Hospitality to develop a commercial colony in the first place.
At that time the company had zero income with a paid up capital of Rs. one lakh and the expenditure of Rs. 43,000 that it had incurred was met using borrowed money. But, “the capacity of the applicant company was nothing else other than Mr. Robert Vadra. The man became a measure of everything and the entire statutory apparatus a castle of sand,” says Mr. Khemka’s reply. Both the land title and LoI were necessary conditions to enable Mr. Vadra’s company to receive advances and execute a collaboration agreement with DLF Ltd for development of the land. The DTCP helped in other ways too.
DLF applied twice in August and in September 2008 for a commercial licence for this land, which it did not get. Then, on 18 November 2008 (the reasons are not clear, Mr. Khemka writes, because the department did not provide him the documents), Skylight makes a fresh application to the DTCP, and the collaboration agreement is indicated in the application to justify the ‘capacity’ of Skylight Hospitality to develop a colony. The agreement records that Skylight had by then transferred possession of the land to DLF.
“The agreement which was not registered was entertained illegally by the DTCP, even though Skylight had transferred possession of the land” by then. “This in itself was sufficient to withdraw the first letter of intent issued in March. Instead, Licence no 203 of 2008 was granted to M/s Skylight Hospitality on 15/12/2008. … This proves that all transactions entered into by M/s Skylight were sham,” says Mr. Khemka.
Mr. Khemka points out that as per the Collaboration Agreement, the Land Owners contribution was the Land Title and a Letter of Intent from the DTCP for grant of commercial colony licence on 2.701 acres; the rest of the responsibility was of the Developer, including obtaining commercial colony licence from DTCP, development of commercial project/buildings with FAR of 175 and maintenance of the assets created. In addition, the gross commercial area developed (which translates to a staggering 2,05,820 sq ft) was to be shared equally between the Land Owner and the Developer. This shows that Skylight Hospitality had no intent to develop the land.
“The Land Title and LoI for grant of commercial colony licence were sham transactions routed through M/s Skylight Hospitality so that part of the unofficial premium on account of commercial colony licence is remitted in white by the Developer, M/s DLF Retail Developers, to M/s Skylight Hospitality acting as a middleman to the deal of obtaining colony licence from the DTCP.”
Mr. Khemka has further discovered that the authorised signatory of M/s DLF Retail Developers Ltd in their applications dated 21.08.2008 and 24.09.2008 to the DTCP for commercial licence for 2.701 acres is Devinder Singh. However, the same person is also the special power of attorney holder of Skylight Hospitality in the same applications. This means that both DLF and Skylight Hospitality are represented by the same person who has been simultaneously signing multiple documents for both parties.
What prompted Onkareshwar Properties, a company that has close connections with top ruling Haryana politicians, to oblige Skylight Hospitality? Mr. Khemka points out that after executing the sale deed in favour of Mr. Vadra’s Skylight without receiving Rs. 7.9 crores as sales consideration, the company was given two group housing licences in village Sihi Sector 82 of Gurgaon for 6.2 acres and 15 acres. It was granted another licence for plotted development for 4.8 acres in Shikohpur, taking its net assets, which stood at Rs 6783 in March 2005, to a bank balance of Rs. 70.84 crores by March 2011 with a paid up share capital of just Rs. 25 lakhs.

‘Vadra used falsified documents, sham transactions to collect premium on land deal’

  • IAS officer Ashok Khemka has submitted a report on Robert Vadra's land deals.
    PTIIAS officer Ashok Khemka has submitted a report on Robert Vadra’s land deals.
  • IAS officer Ashok Khemka has submitted a report on Robert Vadra's land deals.
    IAS officer Ashok Khemka has submitted a report on Robert Vadra’s land deals.

Haryana IAS officer Ashok Khemka submits 100-page report to government

Ashok Khemka, the Haryana IAS officer who cancelled a land deal mutation between Robert Vadra and real estate giant DLF Universal Ltd last October, has told the Haryana government that Mr. Vadra falsified documents and executed a series of sham transactions for 3.53 acres land in Shikohpur village of Gurgaon, thereby pocketing a hefty premium on a commercial colony licence through money that he could account for.
Mr. Vadra, who is Congress president Sonia Gandhi’s son-in-law, was favoured and aided in making these ‘sham transactions’ by Haryana’s Department of Town and Country Planning (DTCP), alleges Mr. Khemka, accusing the department of ignoring rules and regulations “to allow crony capitalists operating as middlemen to flourish and appropriate [the] market premium of a licence.”
He has made these assertions in a 100-page reply to a report of a three-member enquiry committee set up by the Haryana government last October to look into the Vadra-DLF deal. The committee had indicted Mr. Khemka for cancelling the deal. Mr. Khemka’s reply, submitted on May 21 and accessed by The Hindu, has been put together with the help of publicly available documents and his own findings, after the government stonewalled his efforts to get the official documents concerning the sale, issue and transfer of the license to DLF.
Though nearly three months have elapsed since his reply was submitted, Haryana Chief Secretary P.K. Chaudhary told The Hindu that Mr. Khemka’s “voluminous reply is being examined and the points raised by him are being looked into.”
Mr. Khemka states that both the sale deed of February 12, 2008 — through which Mr. Vadra’s company, Skylight Hospitality, bought the land from Onkareshwar Properties — and the letter of intent for granting a commercial licence to his company issued by the DTCP in March 2008 are sham transactions, executed only to enable Mr. Vadra to collect market premium accruing to him due to state largesse.
“If there was no payment as alleged in the registered deed, can it be said that the registered deed conferred ownership title over the said land upon Skylight Hospitality by virtue of the sham sale?” he asks.
The law defines “sale” as a transfer of ownership in exchange for a price paid or promised or part-paid and part promised. Mr. Khemka notes that “there was no promise to pay in the future in the registered deed. No price was paid as claimed in the registered deed … The “sale” registered in the said deed cannot, therefore, be called a “sale” in the true sense of the term, legal or moral, and it cannot be said that Skylight Hospitality became owner of the land in question by virtue of the “sale” registered in [the] deed.”
According to Section 82 of the Registration Act, 1908, the penalty for making false statements, delivering false copies or translations, false personation, and abetment is punishable with imprisonment up to 7 years, he notes.
Earlier this year, the Haryana government’s committee had concluded that the orders passed by Mr. Khemka initiating an enquiry into Mr. Vadra’s land deals were “without jurisdiction, inappropriate and not covered under any provisions of any statute or rules.” Also, that his order cancelling the land mutation was administratively improper. Mr. Khemka was not permitted to present his stand before this committee.
In his reply to the committee’s indictment, Mr. Khemka states that not just the sale deed through which Mr. Vadra became the owner of the land, but the balance sheets filed by Skylight Hospitality as on 31 March 2008 are also false. These, he says are offences under Sections 417, 468 and 471 of the IPC and the Companies Act 1956. Further, on 5 August 2008, Skylight Hospitality entered into an unregistered collaboration agreement with DLF Universal for 2.7 acres of this land, that Mr. Khemka terms as “an illegality that led to [the] loss of crores of revenue to the State exchequer” because a collaboration agreement of this kind has to be registered.
“It was known all along to the DTCP that the actual developer of the colony would be DLF and the routing of the transaction through Skylight was a subterfuge to remit part premium into the accounts of Skylight Hospitality Private Ltd,” he says.
The DTCP permitted Skylight to transfer the licence to DLF in April 2012, and the licensed land was finally sold to DLF on 18th September 2012. Mr. Khemka goes on to say, “By allowing the transfer of licence issued in the name of Skylight to DLF, the DTCP created a black market for trading in licences where cronies are issued licences which are later sold or transferred with ‘permission’ of the authority for a fat consideration, to the real developers.” He has demanded a white paper on the transfer of all such licences permitted in the past to “expose the diabolical game of looting public wealth.”
According to Mr. Khemka’s note, the DTCP issued various types of colony licences for a total of 21,366 acres in the last 8 years of Bhupinder Singh Hooda’s tenure from 2005 to 2012. He points out that if the market premium for a colony licence is assumed to be as low as Rs. 1 crore/acre, the land-licensing scam in the past eight years is worth roughly Rs. 20,000 crore. At the premium of Rs. 15.78 crore/acre that Mr. Vadra earned, this figure would jump to a staggering Rs. 3.5 lakh crore.

Why this secrecy over Sonia Gandhi?

“Why is it that the mainstream media (MSM) displays, what can only be termed as pusillanimity bordering on the obsequious when it comes to Sonia Gandhi?” is the question that bounces around inside my head quite often. Occasionally it lights up my amygdala.

There is a certain docile, rebarbative and delightfully ludicrous air about the MSM each timeSonia Gandhi (or one of her family members) is in the middle of a controversy. I will not get into the impressive range of controversies that have cropped up over the years, but suffice to say that each time things came to such a pass, either the clouds blew over in wondrous haste or they rained elsewhere.

What makes Sonia Gandhi go unscathed from all the mainstream media torrent? PTI.

What makes Sonia Gandhi go unscathed from all the mainstream media torrent? PTI.

A dripping wet poodle Prime Minister is what you occasionally get, as evidenced by the recent developments surrounding Ashwani Kumar and Pawan Bansal.

After years of peddling the Our-PM-is-the-most-honest-of-them-all-in-the-entire-galaxy balderdash the MSM seems to be finally catching up with the meaning of words like integrity & accountability, as they get busy aiding and abetting – quite reflexively – some dark, unknown and easy-to-guess forces to bury the non-performing nightwatchman Prime Minister six feet under.

But the Queen continues to escapes their collective gaze. Blame Proxy-o-cracy!!

To give credit where it is due though, over the last few days, there has been a sprinkling of articles that at least attempt to ask – meekly so – a few pertinent questions along the lines of if-Sonia-is-the-fount-of-executive-power-then-should-the-buck-not-stop-with-her-on-India-becoming-a-Scamrashtra. Laying the axe to the root, if you will.

The most scathing commentary yet…

“Should Sonia Gandhi, ruler of the Congress party, be congratulated for finishing 15 years in Indian politics? It is not a sign of expertise if an heir becomes king. So why should it be different with her?” asked Surjit Bhalla in an The Indian Express piece titled ‘Evaluating Sonia, the black box leader’ (March 23rd, 2013) before he drove the screw deeper: “Every political leader has been pilloried in India, and in most democracies. Pilloried for being stupid, unfit to rule and worse; yet, such questions are not raised with regard to Sonia. Our free press can make mincemeat of even decent politicians (Manmohan Singh has been variously described as spineless, a night-watchman following orders, Mumble Singh and worse) and yet the press has never even demanded that the chairperson of the Congress for 15 years hold a press conference in a language of her choosing — English, Hindi or Italian”.

Ouch! In his follow-up piece a week later ‘Message to Sonia: Reform of Perish’, he concluded his incisive commentary thus:

“Recall that Annie Besant became president of the Congress party in 1917. If Sonia Gandhi does not change, then she risks the following obituary of the party she heads: It took a white, European, socialist, woman to help create the Congress party — and it has taken a white, European, socialist, woman to destroy it more than a hundred years later.”

Ouch ouch ouch!

I acknowledge that the 7 aspects that I will now touch upon briefly – three in this Part, and four in Part 2 – are by no means either completely unknown, or constitute all that needs to be debated, discussed and perhaps put under the journalistic scanner. The purpose of this 2-part series is to act as a gentle reminder to the Indian MSM (especially TV) that the citizens are not fooled by their attempts at silence on issues surrounding Sonia Gandhi & family. Or as M.J.Akbar noted:

“That purr in the ear isn’t the music of your back being scratched, darling; it’s the crackle of your slim wallet being emptied of ethics”.

The poor little powerful Queen

Is it really true that Sonia Gandhi’s financial assets are a mere 1.37 Cr [2009 affidavit]? Let me strive for a little more exactitude, so that I am not accused of crude approximations. Take a look at the table below (source –

Table comparing assets of national leaders.

Table comparing assets of national leaders.

I leave you and your powers of incredulity – which I am certain are immense – to decide if this matter warrants further enquiry. You can access the affidavit details by clicking here. While we are on affidavits, it may well be worth your while spending a minute or two examining the affidavits of Rahul Gandhi, with special focus on the educational qualifications. The matter was discussed in greater detail by me a few months ago in a piece titled ‘Rahul Gandhi: PM-in- waiting despite all this?’

One set of rules for the slaves, another for the suzerainty

In August 2011, India Today ran a small report titled ‘What Gandhis don’t tell the Lok Sabha‘, and I quote:

It’s common courtesy for MPs to inform the secretariat about trips abroad, even if they are of a personal nature. But since June 2004, the month UPA came to power, the Congress president and her son have not bothered to inform the secretariat about any of their foreign trips.

Subsequently, two applications were filed under RTI seeking details on foreign travels of MPs and foreign travels of Sonia Gandhi – what followed was a merry-go-round involving the Lok Sabha Secretariat, Prime Minister’s Office (PMO), Central Information Commission (CIC), Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs and National Advisory Council’s (NAC) Central Public Information Officer.

“It is disturbing that institutions that run the government have no knowledge of the authority that can furnish details of Sonia Gandhi’s foreign travel,” noted an exasperated RTI activist. (You can read the full report here)

The curious case of Dr. Subramanian Swamy’s blog

Most of you would be familiar with the content of Dr. Swamy’s blog; those of you who have not made your acquaintance with it yet, please fire up your search engines. Whilst it is nobody’s case that every word in there is the gospel truth – and some of Dr. Swamy’s utterances on other issues may be a tad jarring to some of us – the following 2 points merit some thought:

1) If the matter presented in his blog-post(s) is untrue and borders on libel, why have the concerned parties not sued him?

2) On the other hand, if the matter holds some truth in its folds, why has the MSM never gone to town with it? Why the silence? Or is it a case of the unutterable refusing to chase the uneatable, with apologies to Oscar Wilde?
What gives?

The last gasp of National Herald

Subramanian Swamy 

To begin with, and briefly: In 2011, Ms. Sonia Gandhi and her son, Mr. 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.

The Ma-Beta corrupt duo hold 76 per cent of the total equity (38 per cent shares each) in the company, while Congress party treasurer Motilal Vora and Oscar Fernandez held the remaining 24 Congress party Treasurer. If any person or group holds more than 74 per cent of a company’s equity, the company can be virtually administered without caring for other shareholders. Thus, Young Indian is a Gandhi-Maino private enterprise that is directly administered by the duo.

Now, we come to the brazen corrupt plot of the duo to acquire another well-endowed entity in terms of assets. The Associated Journals Private Ltd. (AJPL) is that another company. AJPL—the owner-publisher of National Herald, Navjivan, and Quami Awaz newspapers—was set up by prominent Congress leaders in 1938. Jawaharlal 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, and some places like on the prime land in Delhi and Lucknow, built massive offices on public donations for the publication of its newspapers.

But, like all Nehru-Gandhi-Maino proclaimed public “enterprises,” AJPL’s main mission of publishing newspapers soon ended in failure. By the 1970s, all three newspapers were running in terrible losses; they failed to pay employees’ wages. Labor agitation forced the owners to close the operations in a lock-out. The shareholders’ list by then had got depleted by death, 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. But he failed to disclose this in his sworn affidavit filed as a candidate for Lok Sabha in 2009.

In his sworn assets statement, he declared as ‘Nil’ his shares in companies, when in fact he at least owned three lakh shares in AJPL, and controlling shares in Back-Ops company that he set up during the NDA regime. The Back-Ops ownership was later handed over to sister Priyanka by a backdated 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” began by Young Indian and executed in four steps:

(i) Step 1: Moribund AJPL obtains an unsecured zero interest loan of Rs 90 plus crore from the All India Congress Committee (AICC) in 2011 with no stated purpose (but now the spin given by Congress spokesman Janardan Dwivedi is that the loan was for the emotional attachment of Congress party for 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 shareholder and Director in Young Indian, the prospective buyer of AJPL!

(ii) Step 2: Young Indian enters the picture with a proposal made by Young Indian Director Motilal Vora to AJPL president Motilal Vora that he would 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.

(iii) Step 3: AJPL, acting on 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.

Who cares that Young Indian is not a media company which cannot buy a media company that has got land allotted by government and obtained bank loans on the condition that it is a media company producing newspapers?

Before buying AJPL, Rahul Gandhi transfers 262,411 of his three 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 down to size, with Ahmed Patel ensuring 24×7 media publicity to scare the wits out of Mr. Vadra.

(v) Step 4: The seven-storey Herald House is now securely with Young Indian. The Ma-beta duo illegally opens Herald House, which is in the prime area of New Delhi, for renting. A Passport Seva Kendra rents a large space of two floors, and Minister of External Affairs S.M. Krishna inaugurates the office. Huge, six months’ rent is collected by Young Indian from multinational companies which are soon to start offices in Herald House. The acquisition process is now complete.

Thus the deal was to grab the Rs 1,600-crore worth Herald House and other properties of National Herald and 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 AICC for owning the Rs 90 crore obtained from AICC as an unsecured, zero-interest loan and now written off by the AICC.

Now what illegalities have been committed?

1. The deal is a sham, bogus, and a violation of several laws including Companies, the 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., has been illegally sold to builders of luxury skyscrapers, malls, and housing for Congress Ministers. This is a 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 10, Janpath, New Delhi, is government-provided accommodation 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, and GD Birla, as also some defunct Kolkata-based companies. Hence the Board Meeting of AJPL handing over the company to Young Indian is a violation of the Companies Act and is an offence as well as a fraud on the public.

I urge, therefore, an immediate probe by the Serious Fraud Investigation Office and CBI 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.

Mr. Rahul Gandhi also committed perjury when he told a lie in his 2009 nomination paper for Lok Sabha that he owned ‘NIL’ shares when he owned in fact over three lakh shares of AJPL in 2009.

The bottom line is that National Herald—for which his great grandfather 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 objectives do not include bring out a newspaper. Rahul Gandhi himself told the PTI on October 9, 2012, after swallowing AJPL, “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 5,000-crore of property has been obtained.

Ironically, Herald House is built on a kabaristan on Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg. The Mama-son duo knows the Biblical saying—from dust to dust!

Posted on : 11-15-2012

Robert Vadra and Priyanka going for a Divorce?

Robert Wadhra and Priyanka divorce Robert Vadra and Priyanka going for a Divorce?Indian social activist, Kejeriwal  allegations against Sonia Gandhi son-in-law Robert Vadra has lead to split in the Gandhi family.

Priyanka Gandhi Vadra is the daughter of former Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi and UPA Chairperson Ms. Sonia Gandhi was married to Robet Vadhra.

Robert Vadra family hails from Pakistan came to India and settled in early 80s’ . He met Priyanka Gandhi when she was 13 and later married her in 1997. He started his business in jewellery and handicraft exports , masterpieces supplied by Hyderabad-based Karni Jewellers (yesterday its new showroom was opened by Amala). Later he became a business tycoon within a short span like Jagan Mohan Reddy, using his in laws political influence.

Even after several warning from Sonia Gandhi & Priyanka ,He never cared them and continued his business deals with political leaders of several parties. Thus, rift in the family began to widen and at one point of time Priyanka had came before media to say that there are no differences.

But, with recent Kejeriwal serious allegations  Priyanka left with no choice ,she left Vadra place and staying with her mother in 10 janpath for last few days. Its heard that Priyanka is planning to file a divorce soon to keep her family reputation .

Political chicanery – A. Surya Prakash. Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi of Young Indian as joint grabbers of prime properties

The properties grabbed are not restricted to Herald House on the Fleet Street of Delhi, but extend to places like Indore, Bhopal and Mumbai.

See Dr. Swamy’s statement calling for FIR on cognizable offences and custodial interrogation of Sonia Gandhi and her son Rahul Gandhi



I have communicated to the Chief Minister of Madhya Pradesh, Mr. Shivraj Chauhan that, based on the CNN IBN investigation being broadcast, he must set up a SIT inquiry into the real estate fraud in the Associated Journals Pvt Ltd which is a wholly owned company of Young Indian Pvt Ltd, which company in turn is controlled by Ms. Sonia Gandhi and Mr. Rahul Gandhi, both public servants as defined by the Prevention of Corruption Act.

SIT investigation is necessary since the offences committed by the AJPL, the culpability for which devolves now on Young Indian Pvt Ltd and therefore the Gandhi mother-son duo, are fully liable for multiple offences which range from criminal breach of trust under IPC, Prevention of Money Laundering Act, to Companies Act.

For SIT a FIR has to be filed for these cognizable offences, and it will be necessary for Ms. Sonia Gandhi and her son Rahul Gandhi to be subject to custodial interrogation.

Herald land scam: Subramanian Swamy seeks SIT probe | Nov 12, 2012, 00:11AM IST
Published on Nov 10, 2012 by ibnlive
After Delhi, Lucknow and Mumbai, another Herald land row has come to light. This time in Bhopal where a shopping mall was built on the land sold to the newspaper at a concessional rate. The BJP-led state government is now planning to take back the plot. Janata Party leader Subramanian Swamy’s allegation on Congress President Sonia Gandhi and General Secretary Rahul Gandhi over Associated Journals limited that once published the National Herald and Quomi Awaaz newspapers has provided a fresh opportunity to the ruling BJP in Madhya Pradesh to score some political points.

The government is now saying it would soon acquire properties that have been constructed on the land that was allotted to Associated Journals limited in 1981 by the than Congress government led by Arjun Singh. The land allocation, however, has already been cancelled in March this year. The Congress party is washing its hands from the deal saying the land was sold to a former minister once the papers shut down.

New Delhi/Bhopal: Janata Party supremo Subramanian Swamy has attacked the ruling Congress at the Centre by demanding an SIT inquiry into the Herald land scam in Bhopal.

As per reports, the plot of land that was sold at a concessional rate to the newspaper was used to build a shopping mall, Zee News reported.

CNN-IBN stated that the BJP-led government in Madhya Pradesh (MP) is planning to take the plot back.

Swamy had earlier heaped charges of corruption against Congress president Sonia Gandhi and general secretary Rahul Gandhi over Associated Journals that once published National Herald and Qaumi Awaaz newspapers.

In the wake of Swamy’s charges, the MP government too has reportedly been planning to take back the properties built on the land allotted in 1981 to Associated Journals by the then Arjun Singh-led Congress government.
Now, Herald land row comes to light in Bhopal too POLITICS NEWS, Updated Nov 11, 2012 at 11:04am IST

Bhopal: After Delhi, Lucknow and Mumbai, another Herald land row has come to light. This time in Bhopal where a shopping mall was built on the land sold to the newspaper at a concessional rate. The BJP-led state government is now planning to take back the plot. Janata Party leader Subramanian Swamy’s allegation on Congress President Sonia Gandhi and General Secretary Rahul Gandhi over Associated Journals limited that once published the National Herald and Quomi Awaaz newspapers has provided a fresh opportunity to the ruling BJP in Madhya Pradesh to score some political points.
The government is now saying it would soon acquire properties that have been constructed on the land that was allotted to Associated Journals limited in 1981 by the than Congress government led by Arjun Singh. The land allocation, however, has already been cancelled in March this year. The Congress party is washing its hands from the deal saying the land was sold to a former minister once the papers shut down.

The building in Bhopal’s industrial district built on the 56000 square feet was allotted to Associated Journals limited by the Congress government in 1981. In March 2012, a year after the land lease expired, the Bhopal Development Authority cancelled the land allocation. But the property has continued to stay in the possession of the heirs of former Congress minister Tanvant Singh Keer.

Housing and Environment Minister, Madhya Pradesh, Jayant Malaiya said, “The property could not be sold or rented out. The terms and conditions have been violated. The interests of the state would be protected.”

The opposition Congress party has tried to avoid controversy by stating that the land had already been sold. Congress treasurer Motilal Vohra wrote a letter to the Bhopal Development Authority in November 2011 that says all conditions of the lease deed are being followed.

Spokesman state Congress Manak Aggarwal said, “The land was sold to the than minister Tanvant Singh Keer. Once the paper stopped publishing the than Bureau Chief came with a proposal and the trust decided to sell it off.”

The ruling BJP by expressing its desire to acquire the property constructed on the land allotted to Associated Journals limited is also trying to tame other organisations who are making commercial use of the land allotted for newspapers. The Supreme Court of India has already directed to impose a penalty on such violations but the state government has not moved beyond serving notices.

November 13, 2012 (Page 8)

This heralds a new low in political chicanery

A Surya Prakash

The Congress cannot be allowed to get away by glib talk to justify the brazen diversion of party funds to help the Nehru-Gandhi family acquire a stake in a piece of prime real estate in Delhi

At a time when there has been a phenomenal increase in the funds pouring into the coffers of political parties, the allegations made by Janata Party president Subramanian Swamy regarding the misuse of funds by the Congress’s first family to usurp the Rs 1,600 crore Herald House on Delhi’s ‘Fleet Street’, raises the broader issue of defining permissible parameters for the deployment of party funds.

According to Mr Swamy, a tireless crusader, Congress advanced an interest-free loan of Rs 90 crore to The Associated Journals Ltd that owned the now defunct National Herald. This loan was meant to take over the liabilities of TAJL. Later, another company called Young Indian was launched, in which Ms Sonia Gandhi and Mr Rahul Gandhi together hold 76 per cent of the shares. This company subscribed to a fresh issue of shares of TAJL by paying a meagre Rs 50 lakh, but this was enough to gain control. Through this manoeuvre, the mother-son duo have acquired control of Herald House on Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, Delhi’s ‘Fleet Street’. The wily manner in which this property has been appropriated would put Punjabi Bagh real estate agents to shame!

These transactions also go to prove that the Nehru-Gandhis have proprietorial control over the Congress. That is why, the party ‘loans’ Rs 90 crore to TAJL and thereafter a company owned largely by 10 Janpath — Young Indian — acquires control of TAJL. All these manoeuvres should come as no surprise to those who have closely followed the methods deployed by the family to gain control of large tracts of real estate all over Lutyens’ Delhi.

But, Mr Swamy’s accusations raise the larger question of where and how political parties should be allowed to spend their money. Can they enter into business activities or enable companies owned by their office-bearers to acquire properties or businesses? These questions merit urgent consideration for the simple reason that, in the last decade there has been a staggering growth in the income of political parties.

Thanks to the sustained efforts of the Association of Democratic Rights, we now have authentic information on the kind of funds available with political parties in the country. The organisation took the RTI route to ferret out information. Following an application by the ADR, the Central Information Commission directed the Income Tax authorities to furnish details of the income tax returns filed by recognised national and State political parties since 2004-05. Thereafter, National Election Watch and the ADR collated and analysed the data and put their findings in the public domain.

The ADR’s analysis showed that the top five political parties with the highest total income over this seven year period are: the Indian National Congress (Rs 2,008 crore), the Bharatiya Janata Party (Rs 994 crore), the BSP (Rs 484 crore), the Communist Party of India-Marxist (Rs 417 crore) and the Samajwadi Party (Rs 279 crore). It found that a major source of income for most political parties was ‘donations and voluntary contributions’.

However, interestingly, donations from named contributors (persons who donate more than Rs 20,000) and whose contributions have to be mandatorily declared “form a very small percentage of total income of political parties”. The analysis of the data for the last two of these seven fiscal years by ADR has showed that BJP’s donations from named donors amount to 22.76 per cent of its total income, whereas it was just 11.89 per cent for the Congress.

The BSP, strangely had not received any donation above Rs 20,000 although its total income for the two years was Rs 172.67 crore. The Nationalist Congress Party, on the other hand, got 4.64 per cent of its income from named donors. There was also much variance in the nature of incomes of the two Communist parties — CPM got just 1.29 per cent, whereas the Communist Party of India showed 57.02 per cent of its income from donations above Rs 20,000.

As per this data, the total income of six national parties over seven financial years since 2004-05 is around Rs 4,000 crore. The Congress had an income of Rs 222 crore in 2004-05, the year the United Progressive Alliance headed by that party, came to power. The party’s income jumped to Rs 467 crore in 2009-10, the year this coalition obtained a fresh mandate. In 2010-11, the income was Rs 307 crore. The Congress’s total income since 2004-05 is Rs 2,008 crore, making it the most affluent political party in the country.

The Congress has not denied Mr Swamy’s accusations. Initially, it thought it could get away by showering insults on him. But this did not work because, on the face of it, the National Herald operation looked like a ploy to usurp a valuable piece of real estate. Wiser counsel prevailed sometime later and the party spokesman claimed that it was “a matter of pride” for the party to have given such a loan to the company that published National Herald. The party also claimed that it was supporting the company “to help initiate a process to bring the newspaper back to health”. But, this claim of the spokesperson flies in the face of the statement from Mr Gandhi’s office that Young Indian, the new company owned by him and his mother, “has no intention of starting a newspaper”.

The party’s explanations will not wash, because at the end of the day, a Rs 1,600 crore asset of a defunct newspaper company has been acquired for a pittance by a company which is almost wholly owned by the Gandhis. These dubious transactions raise a host of questions. Prominent among them are whether a political party can engage in commercial activity or deploy funds to promote the business activities of its office-bearers?

Look beyond the Congress and you will see the magnitude of the problem. What if the other political parties which run like proprietorship companies — the Bahujan Samaj Party and the Samajwadi Party — emulate the Congress? If parties are allowed to indulge in such practices, what will become of our democratic system? Can political parties be entitled to tax exemptions if they go commercial? Will not our political parties begin to double up as some kind of tax-exempt commercial institutions in which illegal funds are parked? Since political parties are entitled to tax exemptions under the Income Tax Act, it is not too much to demand that these funds be used only for political purposes. Who will ensure this?

Support to National Herald Interest Free: Cong

NEW DELHI | NOV 02, 2012

Breaking its silence, the Congress tonight rejected allegations levelled by Janata Party President Subramanian Swamy and maintained that its support to National Herald newspaper was interest free loans yielding no commercial profit to the party.

After the party spokesman and other top leaders during the day refused to go into Swamy’s allegations, the party came out with its position in a late night press release.

Congress General Secretary Janardan Dwivedi said in the release that the Congress has done its duty in supporting The Associated Journals Limited to help initiate a process to bring the newspaper back to health in compliance with the law of the land.

“This support was extended by the Indian National Congress in the form of interest-free loans from which no commercial profit has accrued to INC,” the release said.

Yesterday Swamy addressed a press conference in which he alleged that Congress party gave a loan of Rs 90 crores to Associated Journals that published the now defunct National Herald and Quami Awaz, which was in violation of Income Tax and election laws.

He had also said that a new company Young Indian was floated to take over the functioning of Associated Journals by Sonia and Rahul to grab a prized building in the capital and renting it out in violation of laws.

Dwivedi said the object of Congress is the well-being and advancement of the people of India and the establishment in India, by peaceful and constitutional means of a social state based on Parliamentary democracy in which there is equality of opportunity and of political, economic and social rights and which aims at world peace and fellowship.

“In furtherance of its object and its political activities, it is a matter of pride for the Indian National Congress that it has supported The Associated Journals Limited, publisher of the National Herald and other newspapers, founded by Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru in 1937, which have played a role in our freedom movement.

“The Indian National Congress has done its duty in supporting The Associated Journals to help initiate a process to bring the newspaper back to health in compliance with the laws of the land,” Dwivedi said.

NOV 02, 2012
09:47 PM
“The Indian National Congress has done its duty in supporting The Associated Journals to help initiate a process to bring the newspaper back to health in compliance with the laws of the land” >>>>

RIGHT – AND THEN “Gifted” it to Madam Sonia Gandhi, her son Rahul Gandhi, the Congress treasurer and a few Sonia hard core loyalists’ “private” company?

NOV 02, 2012
11:37 PM
“Dwivedi said the object of Congress is the well-being and advancement of the people of India and the establishment in India, by peaceful and constitutional means of a social state based on Parliamentary democracy in which there is equality of opportunity and of political, economic and social rights and which aims at world peace and fellowship.”

Bullshit overload.

NOV 03, 2012
07:39 AM
Cant but look at Swamy with sense of Pride,having met him way back in 1977 before the Elections.

He has made Congress suck up ,Be it 2G or now the 90 c loan to Lady and Son.

The man has been unused by India.Even when asked why he hasnt gone after Gadkari he said that Congress has all the Investigation agencies to probe Gadkari why should he do it.

Can he refom the Judicial System in India

NOV 03, 2012
11:12 AM
There are quite a lot of loose threads in this case due to the loose irresponsible talk of members of bandwagon.You will see that they meticulously avoid mentioning the chronological order of events only to confuse the public.A dubious named not-for-profit company was formed with 76 % shareholding by gandhi family and the balance by motilal vohra , the treasurer of congress party and 90 crore is advanced later to National Herald which has become subsidiary of Young Indian.Certainly it is a conspiracy by the trio to hijack the money of congress party to hijack the property of National Herald.sequentially analysing the events, evidently this 90 crores goes to the enjoyment of Young indian through subsidiary National Herald. No newspaper copy is sold free of cost and hence it has commercial value. The meeting of the company is held in the Official residence of Sonia gandhi reducing to the level of a board room.All these go to prove the veracity of the charges levelled by Swamy but we see fellows like PC Chako, Manish tewari, Dwivedy etc., shout out with dutch courage supporting a failing case. People have become thoughtful, analytical to draw conclusions and the old tactics of these guys to dust the eyes of the aam aadmi in banana republic of india will not work. It will also be necessary to look at whether any fund was diverted out of this 90 crore to the property purchse by Vadragandhiji.It isalso necessry on the part of Outlook India to sequence out the birth of Young Indian, Its MOU and AA in detail, the GM of National Herald to waive off to Young indian with date and the signature of approving signatories, date of issue of the 90 crore cheque and the name of the receiving party, date of its encashment, the date of let out of premises of National Herald to MEA for its pass port office with the monthly rent and service charges and the name of the property owner receiving the rent, items on which money spent out so far for the not-for-profit purposes etc., in order for the readers to know more about the stink this has generated. Will the editor put some investigative journalist on the job? Thanks for the excellent presentations


National Herald affair: It’s fraud all the way

By S Gurumurthy

08th November 2012 07:42 AM

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 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?

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.

S. Gurumurthy is a well-known commentator on political and economic issues.