New Delhi: The charge of an “extensive criminal conspiracy of extortion” with reference to the electoral bonds scheme forms the basis of an FIR registered by Bengaluru police against Union Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, Enforcement Directorate (ED) and office-bearers of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
The complainant, Aditya R. Iyer, a co-president of Bengaluru-based NGO Janaadhikaara Sangharsha Parishath (JSP), has alleged that data pertaining to the purchase of electoral bonds, when read with details of raids conducted by the ED and Income Tax (IT) Department, suggest donors may have coughed up donations to the ruling BJP.
The FIR based on Iyer’s complaint was registered Saturday at Bengaluru’s Thilakanagar police station, at the order of the 42nd Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate (ACMM) court, under sections 384 (extortion), 34 (common intention) and 120B (criminal conspiracy) of the IPC.
The special court relied on two orders passed by the Supreme Court, one declaring the electoral bonds scheme ‘unconstitutional’ and another junking a plea which sought the formation of a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to probe alleged quid pro quo between donors and political parties.
Speaking to ThePrint, complainant Aditya R. Iyer said, “We analysed so many reports highlighting the trend of companies under investigation by agencies donating to BJP through electoral bonds and we followed it up with our own analysis that prima facie established extortion through (use of) investigating agencies in the form of raids, arrests and seizures.”
Iyer supported his plea in court with annexures on data on electoral bonds compiled by the State Bank of India (SBI) at the directions of the Supreme Court. The plea also cited proceedings in the Delhi excise policy case, being probed by both ED and CBI, to allege use of coercion tactics.
Having heard Iyer’s plea, the court said in its order Friday, “Thus, it appears that though the scheme of electoral bonds is declared as unconstitutional by the Hon’ble Apex Court under Article 32, for any criminal action in respect of any criminal wrongdoing under the said scheme the remedies are available under criminal law.”
“Therefore, the complainant appears to be right in approaching this court seeking for an investigation into the alleged criminal wrongdoing of the accused under the said scheme. Hence, in the light of the nature of allegations made in the complaint, this court is of the opinion that an investigation through a competent investigation agency is proper,” it added.
Iyer told ThePrint that the scope of his complaint is not limited to Vedanta or Aurobindo Pharma, and that the two cases have been cited with an aim to expedite legal proceedings. “We have 14 more complaints of extortion with respect to other companies such as Future Gaming, Texport Creation, among others. Now that we have one court order leading to an FIR, we will move ahead with requests to file FIRs in other cases as well.”
Following the registration of the FIR, the Congress, which is in power in Karnataka, demanded Sitharaman’s resignation, alleging she was “guilty politically, legally and morally”. Senior Congress leaders Jairam Ramesh and Abhishek Manu Singhvi placed the party’s demand Sunday.
Origin of electoral bonds case
Iyer first approached the Thilakanagar police station in Bengaluru with his complaint on 30 March this year seeking a criminal case against Sitharaman, BJP office-bearers and ED officials who took part in raids on premises linked to Vedanta and Aurobindo Pharma.
The raids involving Vedanta were conducted in connection with allegations of bribery against Congress MP Karti Chidambaram for ‘facilitating approval’ of visas for Chinese nationals working with a Vedanta subsidiary, while those involving Aurobindo Pharma were linked to the agency’s money laundering probe into the Delhi government’s now-scrapped excise policy.
However, the police did not register an FIR at the time, after which Iyer approached the Deputy Commissioner of Police (South East division). Having made no headway with the police, he then moved the special court for MPs/MLAs seeking directions to the police to register an FIR.
In his complaint, a copy of which is with ThePrint, Iyer sought to name Sitharaman as an accused, arguing that the ED and IT Department are under the Ministry of Finance, and were involved in a “conspicuous conspiracy” orchestrated by BJP office-bearers to extort money.
He also sought to name as accused BJP national president J.P. Nadda, Karnataka BJP chief B.Y. Vijayendra and former chief Nalinkumar Kateel.
Iyer told ThePrint, “Having established a series of donations, we filed a police complaint and pursued. We never take a step back once we take up a case after finding a fit case of coercion and extortion.”
The JSP, Iyer added, was the complainant against former Karnataka Lokayukta Y. Bhaskar Rao who stepped down in December 2015 after his son Ashwin was arrested on charges of running an extortion racket.
“With BJP being the ruling party at the Centre, a comparative study of dates on which electoral bonds were purchased by particular companies/individuals, donated to BJP and the raids conducted by Income Tax or Enforcement Directorate indicates an extensive criminal conspiracy of extortion under the threat of injury to the personal liberty, reputation and even physical nature,” Iyer alleged in the police complaint.
The complaint added, “With this modus operandi, the alleged accused have employed devious means of raids from various agencies as a form of putting victims of such raids in fear of further raids, arrests and seizures.”
Iyer’s complaint went on to say that in order to avoid “hounding by these agencies unleashed on the alleged directions of Smt. Nirmala Sitharaman,” those on the receiving end of the raids were “forced” to cough up “huge sums of money by way of paying the ruling party BJP’s treasury by way of electoral bonds, almost to the tune of Rs 8,000+ crore”.
Aurobindo Pharma a ‘clear cut case’
In the case of Aurobindo Pharma, Iyer cited data made available by the Election Commission of India (ECI) showing that the company purchased electoral bonds to the tune of Rs 49.5 crore between July 2022 and November 2023, and that these bonds were donated to the BJP.
As ThePrint reported earlier, the ED arrested Aurobindo Pharma director P. Sarath Reddy on 10 November, 2022, on charges of involvement in the alleged cartelisation in liquor trade favoured under the Arvind Kejriwal-led AAP government’s now-scrapped Delhi Excise Policy 2021-22. However, in May 2023, a court pardoned Reddy after he turned an approver in the case.
“Aurobindo case is a clear cut case where the agency has not just used ways of raids and arrest and rather went one step ahead by forcing the accused to turn approver in the case to fix a sitting case as the only way to save him from proceedings. In a simpler way, in this case, an agency was used to fix a sitting CM (Kejriwal) from the opposite side,” read the complaint.
It added, “By misusing the entire machinery available at the hands of ED, the accused conspired together to arrest, harass and turn a person into an approver and also extort huge sums of money amounting to Rs 49.5 crore to the treasury of BJP in order to achieve their devious targets.”
“The FIR has uncovered, unmasked, unsealed and unveiled the true nature of the BJP and in particular its number one and number two who planned and executed the whole thing,” Congress leader Abhishek Manu Singhvi said during a press conference in New Delhi Sunday.
The FIR, he added, was lodged only after the court felt that prima facie there was evidence of wrongdoing.
Singhvi’s party colleague Jairam Ramesh maintained that the Congress had nothing to do with the FIR. Singhvi said the Congress was aware that Sitharaman won’t step down despite calls for her resignation, and added that the buck stops with “number 1 and number 2”—an apparent reference to Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Union Home Minister Amit Shah.
“The electoral bonds scheme, struck down by the Supreme Court, struck at the very foundation of Indian democracy as it compromised the principle of level playing field in the elections,” Singhvi said.
(Edited by Amrtansh Arora)
Also Read: Directly, via proxy, or through subsidiaries — how India’s biggest corporates bought electoral bonds