top of page
Jan 265 min read

The Case of DHFL Scam: Who Will Bell the Cat?

Posted on 26/01/2024 (GMT 08:45 hrs)

After consummating the tiresome tasks of scrutinizing, surveying, data-mining, filing numerous RTIs, viralizing petitions-posters-reels-live videos-making docu movies, writing in both e-mail and snail mail all the gatekeepers of legal justice, it is found that the DHFL FD and NCD holders are in a safe place. However, the point is, who will bell the cat after smelling the rats⤡ in the:

a) The current ruling party’s role in the DHFL scam via terror-funding/political charity/political donation


It is found that in the cases of demonetization, farmers’ laws, CAA-NRC-NPR-DPA, Aadhaar-PAN Card Linking, the introduction and consecutive withdrawal of 2000 Rupee Notes (the cost of printing which is Rs. 4.58 per note!! The hassling reconstruction of ATMs to accommodate such new notes is also to be considered here. Is it not an irresponsible, Tughlaqi decision on the present PM’s part; Cf. Mohammed Tughlaq’s introduction of leather-money as a failure⤡): the current ruling party had cut a sorry figure. The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (2016) has been amended 35+ times already. Does not that prove the grand failure of the current ruling party?


Non-Applicability of IBC 2016 on DHFL Scam (with relevant documents for litigation)

If SARFAESI (2002) is there, why fluid IBC (2016) is applied to the DHFL?

b) RBI-appointed Committee of Creditors (CoC) for DHFL’s “contrary to law”, “void”, “materially irregular” resolution process (As pointed out in the second verdict of the NCLAT in the DHFL case, dated 27/01/2022)

It is to be noted that a Resolution Professional (of the CoC) comes within the meaning of ‘Public Servant’ under Section 2(c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Section 233 of IBC does not protect where he has been apprehended red-handed with the bribe amount – Sanjay Kumar Agarwal Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, Anti-Corruption Bureau, Dhanbad – Jharkhand High Court. Thus, the DHFL-CoC is answerable and accountable to the public. They simply cannot get away with the huge amount that they received for conducting a make-believe resolution process.


Recently, the Madras High Court rejected the argument that Section 204 of the IBC and Regulation 23A of the IBBI regulations that govern Insolvency Professional Agencies conferred certain “unbridled disciplinary powers” over resolution professionals.

Madras High Court upholds validity of Section 204 IBC VIEW HERE ⤡ (As reported on 23rd January, 2024 ©Bar and Bench)

“…[t]he Madras High Court affirmed the constitutional validity of Section 204 within the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). This provision grants authority to the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (IBBI) and the Insolvency Professional Agencies to oversee Resolution Professionals (RPs) and commence disciplinary proceedings against them in cases of alleged misconduct.” (Source: VIEW HERE ⤡)

c) Alleged Insider Trader cum Eco-Terrorist Mr. Ajay Piramal’s “winning” bid as a return gift in response to the Flashnet Scam⤡ by committing possible contempt of court by not answering the NCLT’s verdict dated 19.05.2021 and getting hastened justice (by being “more equal than others”!) twice, once in the NCLAT on 25.05.2021 (against the NCLT 19th May order) and in the Supreme Court of India on 11.04.2022 (against the NCLAT 27th January order).

d) Wadhawan Brothers’ Shell Companies and the Bandra Books (Is it possible after the “successful” demonetization drive?)

Though the Wadhawans were in jail initially for the reason of the YES Bank scam, but recently, the Supreme Court of India has rejected the bail of the Wadhawan Brothers in the DHFL case:

e) The deceptive auditing of the Credit Rating Agencies and Auditors (Is it possible after the “successful” demonetization drive?)

f) The Brand Ambassador for DHFL’s role in propagating misleading advertisements for consumers

It must be noted that for similar reasons, Mr. Shah Rukh Khan was criticized after BYJU’s got reported for scamming its consumers.

#~——~#

After viewing the present judiciary’s ambivalence in, e.g.,

i) The Demonetization issue


ii) The Ram Temple controversy

iii) LGBTQIA+ marriage question

iv) Ongoing hearings/proceedings on the transparently opaque Electoral Bonds

What can be seen in all these recent cases is that there is no unanimity of opinion amidst the different benches in the Supreme Court, which are “polyvocal” in nature. Moreover, the “final” verdicts in these cases are often being decided upon simple majority, quite contrary to the US Court System. This type of polyvocal decisions entail that there are many Supreme Courts as told by Mr. Kapil Sibal.


Now, how does this impact the DHFL scam case? Who will bell the cat ultimately?

As pointed out by our present CJI, Justice DY Chandrachud, there are loads of pending cases in the Indian courts, which demand a quickened and effective disposal as soon as possible without becoming a mere “tareekh pe tareekh” (dates after dates) court. How far does this cherished fact of “hastened resolution” accommodate the differing opinions within the Supreme Court? Does it suppress heterogeneous voices of dissent, for example, Justice Nagarathna in the Demonetization verdict or her rightful dismissal of the remission of Bilkis Bano case convicts by the Gujarat Government⤡?


Urging for the Hastened Resolution of the Cases Related to the DHFL: a Letter to the Hon’ble CJI

Do you have faith in the Contemporary Indian Judiciary?

Where shall the DHFL victims go in this condition after four arduous years of relentless waiting for justice? Is it not a case of justice delayed and justice denied? How can it be possible for one to occupy an ongoing company by sheer political help without finishing due judicial process? Without the completion of domestic judicial process, one cannot approach the international bodies like OHCHR and Singapore International Arbitration Centre.

What Piramal can do, the DHFL victims cannot!

Comments

bottom of page