Harshad Mehta securities scam ₹ 5000 Carores 1992

The banks at that time were not allowed to invest in the equity markets. Harshad Mehta had very cleverly squeezed some capital out of the banking system. Another instrument used in a big way was the bank receipt (BR). In a ready forward deal, securities were not moved back and forth in actuality. Instead, the borrower, i.e. the seller of securities, gave the buyer of the securities a BR. The BR confirms the sale of securities. It acts as a receipt for the money received by the selling bank. Hence the name - bank receipt. It promises to deliver the securities to the buyer. It also states that in the mean time, the seller holds the securities in trust of the buyer.

Having figured this out, Mehta needed banks, which could issue fake BRs, or BRs not backed by any government securities. Two small and little known banks - the Bank of Karad (BOK) and the Metropolitan Co-operative Bank (MCB) - came in handy for this purpose.

Once these fake BRs were issued, they were passed on to other banks and the banks in turn gave money to Mehta, plainly assuming that they were lending against government securities when this was not really the case. He took the price of ACC from Rs. 200 to Rs. 9,000. That was an increase of 4,400%.The stock markets were overheated and the bulls were on a mad run. Since he had to book profits in the end, the day he sold was the day when the markets crashed.

Mehta again raised a furore on 16 June 1993 when he made a public announcement that he had paid Rupees 1 Crore to the then Congress president and prime minister, Mr P.V. Narasimha Rao, as donation to the party, for getting him off the scandal case

Harshad Mehta was an Indian stockbroker, well known for his wealth and for having been charged with numerous financial crimes that took place in 1992. Of the 27 criminal charges brought against him, he was only convicted of four, before his death at age 47 in 2001. It was alleged that Mehta engaged in a massive stock manipulation scheme financed by worthless bank receipts, which his firm brokered in "ready forward" transactions between banks. Mehta was convicted by the Bombay High Court and Supreme Court of India^[2] for his part in a financial scandal valued at ₹49.99 billion (US$740 million) which took place on the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE). The scandal exposed the loopholes in the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) transaction system 

Palmolein Oil Import Scam in 1992

Kerala government decided to import palm oil from a Malaysian company in Singapore named "Power and Energy Ltd" above the international price which was approved by the Kerala Cabinet. The Kerala State Government selected Power and Energy Limited arbitrarily without inviting tenders and supposedly at an inflated price and at an excessive service charge and in violation of Central and State government norms existing in India.The price of import was fixed to $405.0 per ton which was higher than the international price of $392.25 per ton. The import order was signed by Thomas, who was then Kerala's Food Secretary. The investigation agency's charge sheet in the case says that this order caused a loss of more than 2.32 cores to the exchequer. The decision was to import 15,000 tonnes of palm oil.

Those accused in the Palm Olein Case

• K. Karunakaran
• Former Food and Civil Supplies Minister T.H. Musthafa (a close associate of Karunakaran)
• Former Chief Secretary S. Padmakumar (who, along with Karunakaran, allegedly met the Singapore-based company representative in New Delhi and agreed informally on the deal as early as October 1991)
• Former Additional Chief Secretary Zacharia Mathew
• Former Managing Director of the Kerala State Civil Supplies Corporation Jiji Thomson
• Director of Mala Export Corporation V. Sadasivan
• Director of P&E Pvt. Ltd Sivaramakrishnan
• P.J. Thomas.

Indian Bank Scandal -1300 carore In 1992

A multi-crore scam was exposed in 1992, when then chairman M. Gopalakrishnan lent ₹13 billion to small corporates and exporters from the south, which the borrowers never repaid.

Varadharajalu is accused of defrauding the Indian Bank of several hundred crores of rupees in connivance of the bank officials.

 Varadharajalu, wanted in 10 cases registered by the CBI in connection with the Indian Bank scam, fled the country to Singapore in 1996 and from there he reached France, he said. 

He obtained French citizenship and evaded arrest since the time he fled India

Airbus scandal 2.5 Cr/week-(1990)

Indian Airlines’s signing of the Rs 2,000-crore deal with Airbus instead of Boeing caused a furore following the crash of an A-320 airliner.

St Kitts forgery 140 carrore 1989

Documents were forged to allege that former prime minister V.P. Singh was a beneficiary of his son Ajeya Singh’s account in the First Trust Corp. at St Kitts, with a deposit of 140 carore.
 
The CBI alleged that between November 1983 and October 1989, Mr. Rao, Mr. Tewari, Chandraswami, K.N. Aggarwal and others entered into a criminal conspiracy with the objective of forging and fabricating certain documents relating to a non-existent bank account in the First Trust Corporation Limited in St. Kitts in the name of Ajey Singh with V.P. Singh as a beneficiary. 

August 20, 1989: A story is published in Kuwait-based 'Arab Times' alleging that Janata Dal leader V P Singh was the main beneficiary of a secret bank account with deposits amounting to USD 21 million in Carribean Island St Kitts.

August 22, 1989: The story is picked up by Indian media.

September 26, 1989: A P Nandey, Deputy Director in the Enforcement Directorate (ED), appointed to probe the charges.

October 9, 1989: Nanday submits his report to ED after visiting the US and St Kitts.

October 11, 1989: Minister of State for Finance Eduardo Faleiro tables the report in Rajya Sabha. Two days later, it is presented before Lok Sabha.

November 26, 1989: Lok Sabha general elections.

December 2, 1989: V P Singh becomes Prime Minister after Rajiv Gandhi demits office following his party's poll debacle.

May 25, 1990: CBI registers FIR against ED Director K L Verma, Nandey, controversial self-styled godman Chandraswami, his aide K N Agarwal alias Mamaji, arms dealer Adnan Kashoggi's son-in-law Larry J Kolb and First Trust Corporation Ltd, St Kitts, Managing Director George McLean.

November 10, 1990: V P Singh government falls.

March 1991: CBI Joint Director N K Singh investigating the case transferred. He wanted to interrogate Chandraswami.

June 21, 1991: P V Narasimha Rao becomes Prime Minister.

November 1995: Nandey dies.

Till January 1996: No progress in CBI probe.

February 10, 1996: People's Union or Civil Liberties moves Supreme Court seeking disclosure of CBI's findings.

February 13, 1996: Supreme Court orders combining of charges against Chandraswami in various petitions and allegations of Narasimha Rao's involvement.

March 25, 1996: CBI files affidavit showing only limited role of Rao in the case.

May 16, 1996: Rao demits office.

July 26, 1996: Supreme Court tells CBI not to close probe against Rao in the cases without its prior permission.

July 1996: CBI recommends Rao's prosecution.

August 1996: CBI seeks opinion from the then Attorney General Ashok Desai.

September 26, 1996: CBI chargesheets Rao, Chandraswami, Mamaji and former External Affairs Minister K K Tewari for criminal conspiracy to tarnish V P Singh's reputation.

October 4, 1996: Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (CMM) Prem Kumar issues NBW against Rao. The same evening, at a special sitting, Delhi High Court grants anticipatory bail to Rao.

October 9, 1996: CBI arrests Rao at his residence in New Delhi, but releases him on bail.

November 4, 1996: CMM rejects Rao's bail plea and asks him to surrender on November 14. Rao moves Delhi High Court.

November 8, 1996: Rao gets interim bail in the case from Delhi High Court.

Dec 3, 1996: Delhi HC issues notice to CBI on PUCL plea for inclusion of former Congress leaders Capt. Satish Sharma and R K Dhawan as accused after Nandey and H C Nahata named them in their confessional statements.

December 5, 1996: Delhi High Court quashes proceedings against Verma for want of sanction to prosecute him. April 10, 1997: Delhi High Court rejects PUCL plea to prosecute Sharma and Dhawan.

May 21, 1997: Rao's counsel R K Anand tells the trial court that Rao ordered enquiry into the reported St Kitts account on late Rajiv Gandhi's instructions.

June 4, 1997: Special Judge Ajit Bharihoke discharges Rao and Tewari for want of substantial evidence against them and orders framing of charges against Chandraswami and Mamaji.

July 3, 1997: Special Court formally frames charges against Chandraswami and Mamaji of criminal conspiracy, fabricating false evidence, forgery for the purpose of harming reputation and using as genuine a forged document. CBI fails to secure presence of Larry J Kolb, while McLean died.

July 28, 1997: Trial commences.

December 23, 1999: HC upholds trial court's decision to discharge Rao and Tewari.

Dec 6, 2000: SC rejects CBI SLP against Rao's discharge.

February 22, 2001: Ajeya Singh deposes.

May 9, 2001: V P Singh deposes.

January 30, 2004: Investigating Officer Keshav Mishra, an Additional Superintendent of Police with CBI, deposes.

April 4, 2004: Recording of prosecution evidence closed.

August 9, 2004: Chandraswami tells the CBI court that V P Singh government falsely implicated him in the case due to his proximity with former Prime Ministers Rao and Rajiv Gandhi.

August 31, 2004: Mamaji dies of prostrate cancer.

September 30, 2004: Special Judge Dinesh Dayal fixes October 25 for pronouncing verdict after final arguments.

October 25, 2004: Chandraswami acquitted.

Bofors scandal(Rajiv Gandhi) In 1987

In 1987, a Swedish Radio broadcast reported that arms producer AB Bofors paid kickbacks to top Indian politicians, including the then PM Rajiv Gandhi, for selling artillery guns to the Indian Army. This transaction happened through an Italian businessman Ottavio Quattrrocchi.

When this news was carried by the Indian media, the Rajiv Gandhi-led government promptly denied the report. But the report was further followed up by The Hindu's correspondent Chitra Subramaniam.

As she started following up on the report, it was revealed that Rs 65 crore was paid to get the deal done.

Further investigations threw up the name of Ottavio Quattrocchi, a broker who rose to power owing to his proximity to the Gandhi family.

Under intense pressure from the Opposition, a Joint Parliamentary Committee was set up to probe the allegations on August 6, 1987. It submitted its report two years later.

With the Bofors kickbacks becoming a major poll issue, Rajiv Gandhi's Congress party was voted out of power in the 1989 general elections. In the same year, Prime Minister V.P. Singh's government barred Bofors from entering into any defence contract with India.

In 1990, the CBI registered a formal complaint in the Bofors case, following which Swiss authorities froze accounts of Svenska and AE Services, which allegedly received unauthorised commissions for the deal.

The Rajiv Gandhi assassination further slackened the investigation, which many say was the reason why Ottavio Quattrocchi was allowed to leave India.

After four years of legal wrangles, Swiss authorities submitted documents over 500 pages to Indian authorities. In 1997, CBI set up a special investigation team and filed cases against Rajiv Gandhi, Quattrocchi, Chadha, defence secretary S.K. Bhatnagar, former Bofors chief Martin Ardbo and the Bofors company.

In 2000, the Hinduja brothers' names cropped up in the investigation and CBI filed a supplementary chargesheet naming the brothers as accused. As a response, the Hindujas issued a statement saying that the funds they received from Bofors had no connection with the gun deal.

Investigations then suffered more setback when former defence secretary Bhatnagar  and Win Chadha, two accused in the case, passed away. In 2004, the Delhi High Court cleared Rajiv Gandhi of his involvement in the scandal.

From thereon the case lost steam. The Indian government lost the plot completely when Quattrocchi, detained in Argentina, was released when Indian authorities failed to furnish details of the court order for his extradition.

In 2009, the government informed the Supreme Court about its decision to withdraw the case against Quattrocchi and in 2011, a Delhi court allowed the CBI to drop all charges against Quattrochhi and close the case.

Howver, the Bofors case returned to haunt the Congress when Swedish police chief Sten Lindstrom revealed that he was the Swedish Deep Throat, a key source of journalist Chitra Subramaniam-Duella. He further said there was no evidence of former Indian PM Rajiv Gandhi or Amitabh Bachchan in the Bofors pay-off scandal.

What is the Bofors deal all about?

India's defence ministry bought howitzers for its army's artillery units from Swedish manufacturer AB Bofors in March 1986 for Rs. 1,500 crore ($285 million).

What is a Bofors gun?

It is a 155mm 39-calibre field howitzer with a range of 25-30 km. The weapon system is operated by a six-member crew and can fire at the rate of 10 rounds per minute. The howitzer can be towed at a speed of 70 kmph, while the self-propelled version moves at eight kmph.

What was the quality of the gun?

The Bofors howitzers were used during the 1999 Kargil conflict with Pakistan and proved to be effective in pounding enemy-held positions with great accuracy.

What is the impact of the Bofors scandal?

The Bofors episode led to India reducing the order for the guns from the originally planned 1,500 to 410. Since then, India has not bought a single artillery gun, even though the army requires it. Proposals of the Indian Army to buy at least four types of guns are still stuck at various stages of procurement.

What is the future for the Bofors guns?

India has got the technical knowhow from the Swedish manufacturer to produce the guns within the country. But that plan too stands suspended for 25 years. Only recently, the government has asked the Ordinance Factory Board to upgrade the Bofors technology and produce guns to meet the army's needs.

Cement Scam involving A R Antulay – ₹300 Carores 1981

He had to resign from the post of Chief Minister of Maharashtra due to allegations of his involvement in corruption. However, the Supreme Court cleared him of all allegations years later. The charges were seen as political ploy to malign him and arrest his political growth. When cleared by the Supreme 

You have to decide It was true or fake.