कालाधन पर केजरीवाल की अर्जी में अंबानी का नाम,यहां पढ़े क्‍या है केजरीवाल की अर्जी में

नई दिल्‍ली। कालाधन मामले में आम आदमी पार्टी  के संयोजक अरविंद केजरीवाल भी कूद गए है।केजरीवाल ने वकील प्रशांत भूषण  के जरिए सुप्रीम कोर्ट में मंगलवार को अर्जी दायर की कि उनके पास कई कालेधन खाताधारों के नाम है,वह इनका नाम सुप्रीम कोर्ट को बताना चाहते है।इसलिए उनकी अर्जी को मंजूर किया जाए।केजरीवाल ने कहा कि उन्‍होंने 2012 में ही कई नाम जारी किए थे जिनमें से एक नाम सरकार ने जो बीते रोज तीन नाम दिए है,उसमें शामिल है।यहां पढ़े केजरीवाल की ओर से सुप्रीम कोर्ट में दायर अर्जी।

ubZIN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

I.A. NO. ________OF 2014

IN

WRIT PETITION (C) NO. 176/2009

IN THE MATTER OF:

RAM JETHMALANI & ORS.                                         ….PETITIONERS

VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                                            …RESPONDENTS

IN THE MATTER OF:

ARVIND KEJRIWAL

R/0 L-403, GIRNAR APARTMENTS

KAUSHAMBI

GHAZIABAD, U.P.                                                        ….APPLICANT

AN APPLICATION FOR INTERVENTION ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT

To,

The Hon’ble Chief Justice of India

And his companion judges of the Hon’ble Supreme Court

Most respectfully showeth:

1. That the present application, seeking permission to intervene in the present proceeding relating to ‘Black Money’, is being filed by the applicant who is a political activist and the Convenor of the Aam Aadmi Party. The Applicant is in personal knowledge of some of the names, having black money stashed in their foreign bank accounts, and also in possession of the statements made by such three persons before Income Tax Authorities at the time of raids of their respective premises, wherein they had made confession about having black money in their foreign accounts and also disclosed the entire modus operandi as to how illegal gotten money are being transferred from India to their foreign accounts and further, how these money are being brought back through hawala transactions. The aforesaid names/information, which have been given to the Applicant by a whistle-blower, were made public by the Applicant through a press conference almost two years back and they are otherwise also very much in possession of the Income Tax Authorities, but they have still not been supplied to this Hon’ble Court. The Applicant is placing all such names/information, which he has obtained through a whistle-blower, before this Hon’ble Court so that a thorough investigation could be ordered against the persons named in the present application and effective steps could be taken in order to check such illegal transactions of black money.
2. The Government has failed to share the afore-said information with this Hon’ble Court despite there being specific direction of this Hon’ble to disclose all such names in its judgment dated 04.07.2011, reported as (2011) 8 SCC 1.This Hon’ble Court in the aforementioned judgment had given specific directions and the same are extracted below:

“(i) The Union of India shall forthwith disclose to the petitioners all those documents and information which they have secured from Germany, in connection with the matters discussed above, subject to the conditions specified in (ii) below;

(ii) That the Union of India is exempted from revealing the names of those individuals who have accounts in banks of Liechtenstein, and revealed to it by Germany, with respect of whom investigations/enquiries are still in progress and no information or evidence of wrongdoing is yet available;

(iii) That the names of those individuals with bank accounts in Liechtenstein, as revealed by Germany, with respect of whom investigations have been concluded, either partially or wholly, and show-cause notices issued and proceedings initiated may be disclosed; and

(iv) That the Special Investigation Team, constituted pursuant to the orders of today by this Court, shall take over the matter of investigation of the individuals whose names have been disclosed by Germany as having accounts in banks in Liechtenstein, and expeditiously conduct the same. The Special Investigation Team shall review the concluded matters also in this regard to assess whether investigations have been thoroughly and properly conducted or not, and on coming to the conclusion that there is a need for further investigation shall proceed further in the matter. After conclusion of such investigations by the Special Investigation Team, the respondents may disclose the names with regard to whom show-cause notices have been issued and proceedings initiated.”

It is submitted that this Hon’ble Court, before issuing the aforesaid directions, had specifically rejected all the objections raised by the Union Government against the disclosure of any such names on the ground of them being bound by a specific treaty with Germany. Some of the relevant paras of the aforesaid judgment are extracted below:

“65. We have perused the said agreement with Germany. We are convinced that the said agreement, by itself, does not proscribe the disclosure of the relevant documents and details of the same, including the names of various bank account-holders in Liechtenstein. In the first instance, we note that the names of the individuals are with respect to bank accounts in Liechtenstein, which though populated by largely German speaking people, is an independent and sovereign nation-State. The agreement between Germany and India is with regard to various issues that crop up with respect to German and Indian citizens’ liability to pay taxes to Germany and/or India. It does not even remotely touch upon information regarding Indian citizens’ bank accounts in Liechtenstein that Germany secures and shares that have no bearing upon the matters that are covered by the double taxation agreement between the two countries.

67……The above clause in the relevant agreement with Germany would indicate that, contrary to the assertions of the Union of India, there is no absolute bar of secrecy. Instead the agreement specifically provides that the information may be disclosed in public court proceedings, which the instant proceedings are. The proceedings in this matter before this Court, relate both to the issue of tax collection with respect to unaccounted for monies deposited into foreign bank accounts, as well as with issues relating to the manner in which such monies were generated, which may include activities that are criminal in nature also. Comity of nations cannot be predicated upon clauses of secrecy that could hinder constitutional proceedings such as these, or criminal proceedings.

82. …….We have perused the documents in question, and heard the arguments of the Union of India with respect to the double taxation agreement with Germany as an obstacle to disclosure. We do not find merit in its arguments flowing from the provisions of double taxation agreement with Germany.”

1. It is further submitted that, despite there being specific directions by this Hon’ble Court for disclosing the names of those persons whose names figure in the list of the persons found to be having illegally routed money in their foreign bank accounts and the fact that it was categorically held the agreement with Germany did not provide any hurdle or prohibition from disclosing such names, the Government has been avoiding the disclosure of any such illicit account holders name.
2.        Meanwhile, the Applicant was supplied some of the names and the documents relating to black money by a whistle-blower and therefore, the applicant through a press conference, held on 09.11.2012, made the entire information public. Copy of the press statement dated 09.11.2012 is being annexed hereto as Annexure A (from page nos. ____to ______). The names, as supplied by the whistle-blower, are mentioned below:

(i)          Mukesh Dhirubhai Ambani

(ii)        Anil Dhirubhai Ambani

(iii)      Motech Software Private Ltd (Reliance Group company)

(iv)       Reliance Industries Ltd

(v)         Sandeep Tandon

(vi)       Anu Tandon

(vii)     Kokila Dhirubhai Ambani

(viii)   Naresh Kumar Goyal

(ix)       Burmans (3 family members)

(x)         Yashovardhan Birla

The Applicant had also obtained, as is mentioned above, the statements of three persons, namely, Parminder Singh Kalra, Vikram Dhirani and Praveen Sawhney, made before the Income Tax Authorities wherein they disclosed the entire modus operandi as to how money was illegally transferred from India to their foreign accounts and how such illegally gotten money were brought back through hawala. Copies of the statements of afore-named persons are annexed hereto as Annexure B (Colly) (From page nos. _____to _______). The summary of the aforementioned statements are as follows:

(i)           Parminder Singh Kalra: He opened an account in HSBC, Zurich on 29.1.2001. He mentioned that he was introduced to the bank by Mr Charles Habnumch, investment consultant based in Zurich. He stated that the deposits in the bank account of around Rs. 8-9 crores were not disclosed to the Income tax authorities in India. After opening the account, he gave cash to some person in India as instructed by Mr. Charles for being deposited in his account in HSBC, Zurich. He stated that he gave the money in several instalments in Delhi to certain persons as instructed by Mr. Charles. Shri Kalra stated that sometimes in 2008 or 2009, he instructed Mr. Charles to close the account. Money of about Rs. 8 to 9 crores was delivered to Shri Kalra at Delhi in cash by several perosns from time to time as per instructions of Mr. Charles. He mentioned that the telephone number of Mr Charles in Zurich is +41-794203575.

(ii)          Praveen Sawhney: He opened an account in HSBC, Geneva in 2004 and that his father Shri Bhushan Lal Sawhney transferred an amount of US $ 1.8 million to his account. He accepted that he withdrew amounts from this account from time to time and as of now $ 4000 to $ 5000 might be remaining as balance. Regarding the modus operandi of withdrawal of money, he used to call the bank officials at Geneva for making withdrawal. HSBC, Geneva used to arrange for delivery of cash in India through their agents in hawala channel. All discussions with the bank officials used to take place telephonically. Arrangement for delivery of cash at Delhi used to be made by bank officials through the use of hawala. Every time a different person came to him to deliver cash at Delhi. Every time he needed to make withdrawal, he contacted the bank officials who arranged for delivery of cash at Delhi through hawala and every time delivery persons were different and he knew none of them.

(iii)        Vikram Dhirani: He opened an account in HSBC, Dubai in the year 2005 and closed it in 2006. Representatives of the bank came to him in Delhi to open the account. The formalities were completed in Delhi and he did not travel to Dubai for opening or operating the account. The Persons authorised by the bank officials used to contact him and collect the cash from him for depositing in HSBC, Dubai. After the money was deposited, he used to get a confirmation from the bank; however, no document was given. He admitted that around Rs. 12 crores of unaccounted income was deposited in the account over a period of time. Same was not disclosed to the income tax authorities. The account was closed in 2006. The representatives of the bank delivered the cash to him in India in case of withdrawal.

The aforementioned facts clearly establish that the bank officials are providing illegal channels for transfer of cash from their client account holder in Delhi to Zurich and subsequently are also instrumental in delivering cash withdrawn by the account holder from Zurich to Delhi. However, the Government, despite having the aforementioned categorical information of names and the modus operandi, has been sitting idle on this entire issue and has been looking for one excuse after another in order to avoid taking action as per the directions of this Hon’ble Court.

1. On 27.10.2014, the present Union Government, after great deliberation and ostensibly under huge public pressure as well as fear of prospect of facing contempt proceeding for non-compliance of the directions of this Hon’ble Court, has disclosed three names, one of which happens to be Pradip Burman. This name was there in the list disclosed by the applicant two years back and hence, it further validates the aforementioned list. The government should have clarified whether the other names mentioned above also appear in the list of persons found to be having ill gotten money stashed in their foreign accounts. As mentioned above, the Income Tax Department had raided a few of those whose names appear in this list. On 9th Nov 2012, the Applicant had disclosed the statements made by the afore-named three individuals before Income Tax authorities, when their premises were raided. These three individuals admitted their offence. However, their names do not appear in the list of three people, whose names have been disclosed by the Government before this Hon’ble Court.

Moreover, as per the information supplied to the Applicant, the Government is taking action against the persons above-named selectively. Whereas harsh actions (like tax raids and prosecution) are being taken against some, the powerful ones are being let off.

1. The growing black economy propelled by widespread illegality in a variety of economic activities coupled with the misuse of the democratic institutions has fuelled corruption in this country. Given its all-pervasive character, the black economy has become “systematic and systemic” having widespread, social, political macroeconomic and institutional implications. However, so far the successive governments have shown total apathy in taking actions against the persons involved in this illegality. The Applicant is, therefore, feeling compelled to approach this Hon’ble by way of the present intervention application. The Applicant prays that the Government be asked to immediately take the following action –

(i)           disclose the names of all such illicit foreign account holders;

(ii)          confirm whether the persons above-named figure in the list which the Government has got of  illicit foreign account holders;

(iii)        obtain the bank statements of last ten years of all such illicit accounts from these account holders and investigate each of the transactions therein;

(iv)        Complete investigations in all such cases in a time bound manner;

(v)          Take strictest action against those who are guilty;

(vi)        The statements made by the three individuals named above before the Income Tax Department shows that how easy it is to open a foreign bank account with illicit money, sitting at home in India and this is still going on, therefore,

a.       The government should immediately stop this hawala route.

b.      Initiate prosecution against the banks which have so far been involved in soliciting illicit money and transferring it abroad through hawala.

PRAYERS

In view of the aforementioned facts, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:

(a)  Allow the applicant to intervene in the present writ petition; and

(b) Pass any other order as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances.

Applicant

Through

(Prashant Bhushan)

Counsel for the Applicant

New Delhi

Dated: 28.10.2014

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION

I.A. NO. ________OF 2014

IN

WRIT PETITION (C) NO. 176/2009

IN THE MATTER OF:

RAM JETHMALANI & ORS.                                         ….PETITIONERS

VERSUS

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.                                            …RESPONDENTS

IN THE MATTER OF:

ARVIND KEJRIWAL

R/0 L-403, GIRNAR APARTMENTS

KAUSHAMBI

GHAZIABAD, U.P.                                                        ….APPLICANT

AN APPLICATION FOR INTERVENTION ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT

To,

The Hon’ble Chief Justice of India

And his companion judges of the Hon’ble Supreme Court

Most respectfully showeth:

1. That the present application, seeking permission to intervene in the present proceeding relating to ‘Black Money’, is being filed by the applicant who is a political activist and the Convenor of the Aam Aadmi Party. The Applicant is in personal knowledge of some of the names, having black money stashed in their foreign bank accounts, and also in possession of the statements made by such three persons before Income Tax Authorities at the time of raids of their respective premises, wherein they had made confession about having black money in their foreign accounts and also disclosed the entire modus operandi as to how illegal gotten money are being transferred from India to their foreign accounts and further, how these money are being brought back through hawala transactions. The aforesaid names/information, which have been given to the Applicant by a whistle-blower, were made public by the Applicant through a press conference almost two years back and they are otherwise also very much in possession of the Income Tax Authorities, but they have still not been supplied to this Hon’ble Court. The Applicant is placing all such names/information, which he has obtained through a whistle-blower, before this Hon’ble Court so that a thorough investigation could be ordered against the persons named in the present application and effective steps could be taken in order to check such illegal transactions of black money.
2. The Government has failed to share the afore-said information with this Hon’ble Court despite there being specific direction of this Hon’ble to disclose all such names in its judgment dated 04.07.2011, reported as (2011) 8 SCC 1.This Hon’ble Court in the aforementioned judgment had given specific directions and the same are extracted below:

“(i) The Union of India shall forthwith disclose to the petitioners all those documents and information which they have secured from Germany, in connection with the matters discussed above, subject to the conditions specified in (ii) below;

(ii) That the Union of India is exempted from revealing the names of those individuals who have accounts in banks of Liechtenstein, and revealed to it by Germany, with respect of whom investigations/enquiries are still in progress and no information or evidence of wrongdoing is yet available;

(iii) That the names of those individuals with bank accounts in Liechtenstein, as revealed by Germany, with respect of whom investigations have been concluded, either partially or wholly, and show-cause notices issued and proceedings initiated may be disclosed; and

(iv) That the Special Investigation Team, constituted pursuant to the orders of today by this Court, shall take over the matter of investigation of the individuals whose names have been disclosed by Germany as having accounts in banks in Liechtenstein, and expeditiously conduct the same. The Special Investigation Team shall review the concluded matters also in this regard to assess whether investigations have been thoroughly and properly conducted or not, and on coming to the conclusion that there is a need for further investigation shall proceed further in the matter. After conclusion of such investigations by the Special Investigation Team, the respondents may disclose the names with regard to whom show-cause notices have been issued and proceedings initiated.”

It is submitted that this Hon’ble Court, before issuing the aforesaid directions, had specifically rejected all the objections raised by the Union Government against the disclosure of any such names on the ground of them being bound by a specific treaty with Germany. Some of the relevant paras of the aforesaid judgment are extracted below:

“65. We have perused the said agreement with Germany. We are convinced that the said agreement, by itself, does not proscribe the disclosure of the relevant documents and details of the same, including the names of various bank account-holders in Liechtenstein. In the first instance, we note that the names of the individuals are with respect to bank accounts in Liechtenstein, which though populated by largely German speaking people, is an independent and sovereign nation-State. The agreement between Germany and India is with regard to various issues that crop up with respect to German and Indian citizens’ liability to pay taxes to Germany and/or India. It does not even remotely touch upon information regarding Indian citizens’ bank accounts in Liechtenstein that Germany secures and shares that have no bearing upon the matters that are covered by the double taxation agreement between the two countries.

67……The above clause in the relevant agreement with Germany would indicate that, contrary to the assertions of the Union of India, there is no absolute bar of secrecy. Instead the agreement specifically provides that the information may be disclosed in public court proceedings, which the instant proceedings are. The proceedings in this matter before this Court, relate both to the issue of tax collection with respect to unaccounted for monies deposited into foreign bank accounts, as well as with issues relating to the manner in which such monies were generated, which may include activities that are criminal in nature also. Comity of nations cannot be predicated upon clauses of secrecy that could hinder constitutional proceedings such as these, or criminal proceedings.

82. …….We have perused the documents in question, and heard the arguments of the Union of India with respect to the double taxation agreement with Germany as an obstacle to disclosure. We do not find merit in its arguments flowing from the provisions of double taxation agreement with Germany.”

1. It is further submitted that, despite there being specific directions by this Hon’ble Court for disclosing the names of those persons whose names figure in the list of the persons found to be having illegally routed money in their foreign bank accounts and the fact that it was categorically held the agreement with Germany did not provide any hurdle or prohibition from disclosing such names, the Government has been avoiding the disclosure of any such illicit account holders name.
2.        Meanwhile, the Applicant was supplied some of the names and the documents relating to black money by a whistle-blower and therefore, the applicant through a press conference, held on 09.11.2012, made the entire information public. Copy of the press statement dated 09.11.2012 is being annexed hereto as Annexure A (from page nos. ____to ______). The names, as supplied by the whistle-blower, are mentioned below:

(i)          Mukesh Dhirubhai Ambani

(ii)        Anil Dhirubhai Ambani

(iii)      Motech Software Private Ltd (Reliance Group company)

(iv)       Reliance Industries Ltd

(v)         Sandeep Tandon

(vi)       Anu Tandon

(vii)     Kokila Dhirubhai Ambani

(viii)   Naresh Kumar Goyal

(ix)       Burmans (3 family members)

(x)         Yashovardhan Birla

The Applicant had also obtained, as is mentioned above, the statements of three persons, namely, Parminder Singh Kalra, Vikram Dhirani and Praveen Sawhney, made before the Income Tax Authorities wherein they disclosed the entire modus operandi as to how money was illegally transferred from India to their foreign accounts and how such illegally gotten money were brought back through hawala. Copies of the statements of afore-named persons are annexed hereto as Annexure B (Colly) (From page nos. _____to _______). The summary of the aforementioned statements are as follows:

(i)           Parminder Singh Kalra: He opened an account in HSBC, Zurich on 29.1.2001. He mentioned that he was introduced to the bank by Mr Charles Habnumch, investment consultant based in Zurich. He stated that the deposits in the bank account of around Rs. 8-9 crores were not disclosed to the Income tax authorities in India. After opening the account, he gave cash to some person in India as instructed by Mr. Charles for being deposited in his account in HSBC, Zurich. He stated that he gave the money in several instalments in Delhi to certain persons as instructed by Mr. Charles. Shri Kalra stated that sometimes in 2008 or 2009, he instructed Mr. Charles to close the account. Money of about Rs. 8 to 9 crores was delivered to Shri Kalra at Delhi in cash by several perosns from time to time as per instructions of Mr. Charles. He mentioned that the telephone number of Mr Charles in Zurich is +41-794203575.

(ii)          Praveen Sawhney: He opened an account in HSBC, Geneva in 2004 and that his father Shri Bhushan Lal Sawhney transferred an amount of US $ 1.8 million to his account. He accepted that he withdrew amounts from this account from time to time and as of now $ 4000 to $ 5000 might be remaining as balance. Regarding the modus operandi of withdrawal of money, he used to call the bank officials at Geneva for making withdrawal. HSBC, Geneva used to arrange for delivery of cash in India through their agents in hawala channel. All discussions with the bank officials used to take place telephonically. Arrangement for delivery of cash at Delhi used to be made by bank officials through the use of hawala. Every time a different person came to him to deliver cash at Delhi. Every time he needed to make withdrawal, he contacted the bank officials who arranged for delivery of cash at Delhi through hawala and every time delivery persons were different and he knew none of them.

(iii)        Vikram Dhirani: He opened an account in HSBC, Dubai in the year 2005 and closed it in 2006. Representatives of the bank came to him in Delhi to open the account. The formalities were completed in Delhi and he did not travel to Dubai for opening or operating the account. The Persons authorised by the bank officials used to contact him and collect the cash from him for depositing in HSBC, Dubai. After the money was deposited, he used to get a confirmation from the bank; however, no document was given. He admitted that around Rs. 12 crores of unaccounted income was deposited in the account over a period of time. Same was not disclosed to the income tax authorities. The account was closed in 2006. The representatives of the bank delivered the cash to him in India in case of withdrawal.

The aforementioned facts clearly establish that the bank officials are providing illegal channels for transfer of cash from their client account holder in Delhi to Zurich and subsequently are also instrumental in delivering cash withdrawn by the account holder from Zurich to Delhi. However, the Government, despite having the aforementioned categorical information of names and the modus operandi, has been sitting idle on this entire issue and has been looking for one excuse after another in order to avoid taking action as per the directions of this Hon’ble Court.

1. On 27.10.2014, the present Union Government, after great deliberation and ostensibly under huge public pressure as well as fear of prospect of facing contempt proceeding for non-compliance of the directions of this Hon’ble Court, has disclosed three names, one of which happens to be Pradip Burman. This name was there in the list disclosed by the applicant two years back and hence, it further validates the aforementioned list. The government should have clarified whether the other names mentioned above also appear in the list of persons found to be having ill gotten money stashed in their foreign accounts. As mentioned above, the Income Tax Department had raided a few of those whose names appear in this list. On 9th Nov 2012, the Applicant had disclosed the statements made by the afore-named three individuals before Income Tax authorities, when their premises were raided. These three individuals admitted their offence. However, their names do not appear in the list of three people, whose names have been disclosed by the Government before this Hon’ble Court.

Moreover, as per the information supplied to the Applicant, the Government is taking action against the persons above-named selectively. Whereas harsh actions (like tax raids and prosecution) are being taken against some, the powerful ones are being let off.

1. The growing black economy propelled by widespread illegality in a variety of economic activities coupled with the misuse of the democratic institutions has fuelled corruption in this country. Given its all-pervasive character, the black economy has become “systematic and systemic” having widespread, social, political macroeconomic and institutional implications. However, so far the successive governments have shown total apathy in taking actions against the persons involved in this illegality. The Applicant is, therefore, feeling compelled to approach this Hon’ble by way of the present intervention application. The Applicant prays that the Government be asked to immediately take the following action –

(i)           disclose the names of all such illicit foreign account holders;

(ii)          confirm whether the persons above-named figure in the list which the Government has got of  illicit foreign account holders;

(iii)        obtain the bank statements of last ten years of all such illicit accounts from these account holders and investigate each of the transactions therein;

(iv)        Complete investigations in all such cases in a time bound manner;

(v)          Take strictest action against those who are guilty;

(vi)        The statements made by the three individuals named above before the Income Tax Department shows that how easy it is to open a foreign bank account with illicit money, sitting at home in India and this is still going on, therefore,

a.       The government should immediately stop this hawala route.

b.      Initiate prosecution against the banks which have so far been involved in soliciting illicit money and transferring it abroad through hawala.

PRAYERS

In view of the aforementioned facts, this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to:

(a)  Allow the applicant to intervene in the present writ petition; and

(b) Pass any other order as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances.

Applicant

Through

(Prashant Bhushan)

Counsel for the Applicant

New Delhi

Dated: 28.10.2014

(10)