Videocon-ICICI Bank loan case: Sufficient material to substantiate allegations against Chanda Kochhar, others, says court
The court also considered other evidence including details of the companies involved, loans given by the bank.
Following Kochhar's appointment as ICICI Bank's MD and CEO from 2009 to 2011, the CBI filed a chargesheet in the matter, saying that ICICI Bank had authorised six loans to businesses connected to the Videocon Group. (File picture
A SPECIAL court stated that it was prima facie established that former ICICI Bank MD and CEO Chanda Kochhar had received a portion of the loan given by the bank to Videocon Group as "reward" through companies established by her husband and co-accused, Deepak. This was stated while taking cognizance of the chargesheet filed in the Videocon-ICICI Bank loan case.
On Wednesday, the special court summoned the defendants, including Kochhar, Deepak, Venugopal Dhoot of the Videocon Group, and six other individuals, to appear before it on August 2. On Saturday, a detailed order issuing summons was made accessible.
According to Special Judge S P Naik-Nimbalkar's decision, it is abundantly obvious that there is enough information to substantiate the charges brought against the accused based on the written and oral evidence provided by the CBI.
Learn more | Kochhar planned loans for Videocon after being chosen for the top position at ICICI in December 2008: CBI
"...it can be fairly assumed that, on the surface, there are reasons to think that the accusation is valid. Each accused person's role and complicity are described, clarified, and supported by proof. The allegations of withholding information, acting improperly when loans were approved, diverting loan funds, misusing funds by diverting them from their intended use, receiving a portion of a loan as an incentive or reward from a public servant through companies set up by her husband, concealing interest in the loan proposal in violation of RBI circulars, and receiving illegal gratification in return for services
The court also took into account additional evidence, such as information about the involved companies and bank loans. Circulars issued by the RBI on loans, including those requiring disclosure of a bank director's potential financial interests, were cited as proof, according to the statement. The CBI's May 28, 2019, letter, according to the court, proved that Kochhar had not declared her association with VIL.
The chargesheet contained information regarding the money transfers in numerous accounts connected to Videocon Industries Limited and NuPower Renewables Limited, both connected to Deepak, according to the court, and based on that information, the roles of each accused person in the transactions were established. It stated that at this point, the CBI has established a prima facie case for charges related to criminal conspiracy, cheating against all of the accused, and criminal breach of trust by a public servant against Chanda Kochhar under sections of the Indian Penal Code.
The court also took into account the argument made by A Limosin, the attorney for the CBI, that since the alleged conduct occurred between 2008 and 2017, the Prevention of Corruption Act would be in effect prior to its changes in 2018.
Union Budget 2023 income tax slabs: New tax regime is default, rebate included...
bureaucratization, financial services, business news, Indian Express, current affairs, Uday Kotak, and Kotak Mahindra Bank
Financial service bureaucratization must be stopped: Uday Kotak's pricing for russian oil
Russian crude surpasses G7 price threshold, but there are implications for supplies to India.
The CBI had filed a chargesheet in the case in April, alleging that ICICI Bank had approved six loans to businesses connected to the Videocon Group after she was appointed MD and CEO of the bank between 2009 and 2011. A firm connected to Deepak allegedly obtained Rs 64 crores during this time, and the CBI claimed that these loans had irregularities. While approving Kochhar's prosecution, the ICICI Bank claimed that it had suffered no unjust loss and instead cited the Rs 64 crore that Deepak's company had received as justification.