Mumbai: In the Rs12,800 crore Punjab National Bank-Nirav Modi fraud case, the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) has given a final opportunity to the Central government to specify the roles of each applicant from jewellery retailer Gitanjali Gems, owned by alleged fugitive economic offender Mehul Choksi.
The NCLT, which has mandated the company’s liquidation, is seeking to understand the roles of each applicant and why they should not be discharged. This comes four years after the Supreme Court set aside the NCLT order freezing the assets of Usha Ananthasubramanian, the bank’s former MD, and an accused in the case. The hearing is scheduled for September 25, 2025.
Central Govt's Response
The Central government, in its response, has requested additional time to proceed in the matter, contending that the report from the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) is still awaited. The NCLT bench has specified in its order that this is the “last and final” opportunity for the government to advance their submissions after reviewing the SFIO report.
The counsel representing the company filed an application pleading to allow the applicant to sell his Worlibased flat and shares in the NSDL’s demat account. The purpose of this request is to deposit the sale proceeds into the savings account maintained with the Standard Chartered Bank and Citibank. The applicant needs to pay a monthly amount of Rs 5,64,341 to Citibank and Standard Chartered against the outstanding loans. However, the counsel representing the government opposed the application.
“It is reasonably apprehended by the applicant that he, who is yet to join the investigations carried out by the SFIO and is residing abroad, may wilfully try to alienate the said property by way of sale, lease, mortgage, or in any other manner, to frustrate any future recovery of ill-gotten gains from the fraud. Therefore, it is importance that the property be protected by keeping it in the possession of the Regional Directorate, Western Region of the Ministry of Corporate Affairs, during the pendency of the proceedings.”
After hearing the arguments, the bench held, “It is clarified that the amount of advance as well as the final sale consideration in relation to the said property shall be credited to home save accounts. The balance lying in the account shall be adjusted against the borrowing of the applicant.”
.jpeg)
