BW Communities

What Happens To Subrata Roy? Sahara Says Can't Pay Rs 36,000 Cr In 18 Months

BW Online Bureau Jul 08, 2015

It has been about 16 months since Subrata Roy has been in jail and chances of his getting out seem bleak. The Sahara group on Tuesday (7 July) had expressed its inability to pay Rs 36,000 crore to its investors within 18 months as ordered by the Supreme Court last month, saying there was “no business house in the world or country” that could pay the amount within the time frame fixed by the court. Sahara’s lawyer Kapil Sibal, however, clarified that the “obligation to pay” wasn’t disputed. Sibal told a special bench headed by Justice TS Thakur that his client would file an application seeking a review of last month’s order setting tough terms for the group to secure the release of its jailed chief, Subrata Roy, in Tihar jail since March last year. Roy was jailed after he failed to appear before the Supreme Court in contempt proceedings initiated by market regulator, the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), after the company did not abide by its 2013 verdict ordering a refund of money collected under two financial schemes declared illegal by the top court. Later, the court said Roy and two jailed directors would be released after the company deposited Rs 10,000 crore – half in cash and the remaining as bank guarantees – as surety amount. Sahara failed to comply with the conditions, which is why Roy remains in jail. The Supreme Court on 19 June had set a schedule for Sahara chief Subrata Roy and his group to return Rs 36,000 crore in instalments over 18 months to the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi). The payments shall begin once Roy and two Sahara group directors are released from Tihar jail. The three-judge bench comprising justices T.S. Thakur, Anil R. Dave and A.K. Sikri was hearing arguments related to a dispute over the sale of a Sahara-owned 145-acre property in Gorakhpur, Uttar Pradesh. While the Sahara group is in advanced negotiations with one party to sell the plot of land for Rs 64 crore, another developer has offered Rs 110 crore. The second developer approached the Supreme Court to consider its proposal to buy the land at a higher price. Trial Court Proceedings Again Roy, Others Stayed Till Aug 18 On July 2, Delhi High court extended till August 18 the stay on trial court proceedings against Sahara chief Subrata Roy, now in Tihar Jail. Justice Suresh Kait said the interim order of April 10, by which the proceedings and bailable warrants were stayed against Roy and two directors of Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd (SICCL), J B Roy and Ranoj Das Gupta, would continue. The court extended relief to the Sahara chief and three others after they sought time to submit their reply to the affidavit filed by the IT department. The IT department in its affidavit has contended that it filed a complaint in the trial court against Roy and the others as they had not filed their returns. In its affidavit, it also said that action was taken after issuing a show cause notice to them and that the amounts claimed by the company and its directors as losses were not correct. By its April 10 order, the court had also stayed the proceedings against SICCL which was made an accused in the case. Besides Subrata Roy, J B Roy and Gupta have approached the court after warrants were issued against them, while another director, O P Srivastava, has also moved court seeking quashing of the trial court proceedings. On March 24, the trial court had issued bailable warrants against J B Roy and Gupta for their failure to appear before it and had sought the presence of all the accused on April 15. It had also issued production warrant for Subrata Roy and directed the jail authorities to produce him before the court. The IT department had on February 13 filed a complaint in the trial court against the company and its directors, Subrata Roy, J B Roy, O P Srivastava and Ranoj Das Gupta for not filing the return of the company for 2013-14. They were booked for offence under Section 276 CC of the IT Act, which deals with failure to furnish return of income in due time. The court had earlier taken cognisance of the complaint and issued summons to the five accused seeking their presence. The income tax return was not filed by them till the time of filing of the complaint and cognisance taken by the court. The IT department's complaint said several notices were issued to the firm and its directors. In their letters, the accused had sought time to file the return but did not do so even after they were granted time. Thereafter, the complaint was filed in the court, it said. But the chances of Subrata Roy getting out of jail has become more and more difficult with the recent terms and conditions set by the Supreme Court.