Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

2.2. The shareholding and Board of REL was reconstituted in the year 2018 after Shivinder Mohan Singh and Malvinder Mohan Singh lost control pursuant to invocation of shares pledged by them with various banks in February 2018. After the said reconstitution, the new management conducted internal enquiries and discovered willful defaults on significant unsecured loans, defined for internal purposes as the Corporate Loan Book (‗CLB'), by borrower entities, either related, controlled or associated with the promoters, all of who had been provided the subject loans from RFL on a non-arms' length basis. The primary allegation in the present case is that Sunil Godhwani, in conspiracy with Malvinder Mohan Singh and Shivinder Mohan Singh caused RFL to give unsecured loans to the tune of Rs. 2,397 Crores, on a non-arms' length basis and without proper documentation, to shell companies related to them and these entities, willfully defaulted in making the repayments. As on the date of the FIR, i.e., 27.03.2019, nineteen such entities were identified which had defaulted on their borrowings from RFL. 2.3. Enquiries further brought to light that the Securities Exchange Board of India (‗SEBI') and the Serious Fraud Investigations Office (‗SFIO') were already investigating the transactions involving REL and related entities. A review of the records revealed that the RBI had, from time to time, expressed concerns about the CLB portfolio of RFL. However, these concerns were allegedly never addressed by the promoters. The RBI had raised concerns about the promoters disbursing high value unsecured loans to entities with no financial standing. In its inspection report dated 06.01.2012, the RBI has observed that the RFL had a practice of parking a major chunk of surplus funds with fellow subsidiary/group companies/other companies which were often being used for taking positions in securities. RBI had further pointed out that the reports pertaining to monitoring of the said loans was not available on record. The RBI had also pointed out that the top borrowers of RFL under the CLB portfolio were related entities. There were inter-linkages between the borrowers, as funds were routed from one borrower to another. 2.4. During the course of investigation, it was revealed that REL was a public listed Core Investment Company (‗CIC'), which had made major investments in its subsidiary companies, i.e., RFL, Religare Health Insurance Co. Ltd. (‗RHL') and Religare Broking Limited (‗RBL'). REL had invested 57.77% percents of its assets and 89.78% of its net-worth in RFL. REL owned 85.64% of the equity-share capital in RFL. Since REL had major investments in RFL, any loss caused to RFL due to the alleged diversion of funds resulted in a direct loss to the shareholders of REL. Investigation revealed that the CLB was created since the inception of RFL, primarily for the purpose of utilization of funds by the promoters. The modus-operandi, as alleged by the investigating agency, was that inter-corporate loans were disbursed to various companies controlled by the promoters, through which funds were routed to companies owned by the promoters, who were the ultimate beneficiaries. The CLB increased gradually because the amounts due towards re-payment of loans were funded through new loans.