- Decade ending FY 2023-24, the total loan write-offs by commercial banks were Rs 12.3 lakh crore.
- 28 businessmen had fled the country in the last decade. Duping India of several lakh Crores.
- Modi Government still to bring back the culprits, forget about poll promises of getting back black money stashed abroad. A promise on which the voters believed and brought in the BJP Government.
- Many of the businessmen cannot be deported to India.
The Indian government has allowed banks to write off significant amounts of loans over the years. For the decade ending FY 2023-24, the total loan write-offs by commercial banks were Rs 12.3 lakh crore. Over the last five years, from FY 2019-20 to FY 2023-24, Indian banks have written off loan’s worth approximately Rs 9.90 trillion (or lakh crore). In the last six years up to FY 2021-22, banks wrote off loans amounting to Rs 11.17 lakh crore. Over nine financial years from 2014-15 to 2022-23, banks have written off bad loans worth Rs 14.56 lakh crore.
These figures indicate a substantial amount of loans that have been written off, mainly by public sector banks, as part of their efforts to manage non-performing assets (NPAs).
“Several high-profile Indian businessmen have left India amid various legal and financial controversies, particularly related to allegations of fraud and defrauding banks.”
Vijay Mallya Known for his involvement with Kingfisher Airlines, Mallya left India in March 2016 after defaulting on loans amounting to Rs 9,000 crore. He is currently in the UK, where he has been fighting extradition back to India.
Nirav Modi, a prominent jeweler, Modi is accused of orchestrating one of the largest banking scams in India, involving fraudulent transactions worth approximately $2 billion with Punjab National Bank (PNB). He left India in January 2018 and was arrested in the UK in 2019, where he’s also fighting extradition.
Mehul Choksi, Modi’s uncle and co-accused in the PNB scam, Choksi left India around the same time as Nirav Modi in early 2018. He gained citizenship in Antigua and Barbuda and has faced legal proceedings related to his extradition. In 2021, he was arrested in Dominica while allegedly trying to flee to Cuba.
Various opposition leaders, including from the Congress party, have accused the Modi government of favoring corporate entities by writing off significant amounts of loans. Rahul Gandhi, for instance, has claimed that loans amounting to around Rs 16 lakh crore were waived off for billionaire friends during Modi’s tenure, suggesting a bias towards certain industrialists.
“The debate over bias in loan write-offs under Modi’s administration reflects a broader political and economic discourse. While there’s evidence of significant loan write-offs, the interpretation of these actions as bias depends largely on one’s political perspective, the distinction between write-off and waiver, and the historical context of banking practices in India.”
Each side uses different metrics and interpretations to argue their point, indicating the complexity of the issue. Ultimately, the user must evaluate this information critically, considering multiple perspectives and the motivations behind each claim.
Jatin Mehta was involved in the Winsome Diamond Group which defaulted on loans amounting to Rs 6,800 crore. Mehta left India for St Kitts & Nevis, a Caribbean nation with no extradition treaty with India.
Ashish and Priti Jobanputra are Promoters of ABC Cotspin, they are implicated in an Rs 800 crore fraud case involving State Bank of India and Bank of Baroda. They are believed to be in Los Angeles after leaving India.
These cases highlight a pattern where businessmen involved in financial irregularities have fled the country, often to nations without extradition treaties or where they could leverage citizenship by investment programs. The Indian government has been actively pursuing extradition in these cases, with varying degrees of success.
“Apart from them, there are several others who are in the list of absconders. Belonging to several states, most of them have relations with a single state that is Gujarat. The absconders include Nishan Modi, Pushpesh Vaidhya, Sunny Kalra, Arti Kalra, Sanjay Kalra, Varsha Kalra, Sudhir Kalra, Jatin Mehta, Umesh Pareikh, Kamlesh Pareikh, Nilesh Pareikh, Vinay Mittal, Eklavya Garg, Chetan Jayantilal, Nitin Jayantilal, Dipti Chetan, Saviya Seth, Rajiv Goel, Alka Goel, Lalit Modi, Ritesh Jain, Hitesh Patel, Mayuriben Patel and Ashish Sureshbhai.”
Several social media posts in the last one decade have highlighted the public sentiment and scrutiny regarding these incidents, with discussions focusing on the governance and enforcement capabilities of the Indian legal system in preventing such escapes.
The phenomenon of Indian businessmen absconding after being implicated in scams can be attributed to several interconnected factors. India’s legal system is often criticized for being slow, overburdened, and sometimes inefficient. This can lead to lengthy legal battles that might not favor the accused even if they are innocent, encouraging some to flee rather than face prolonged legal proceedings.
The penalties for financial crimes, especially when they involve large sums of public or investor money, can be severe. Some might choose to flee to avoid such penalties, especially if they believe they won’t receive a fair trial or if they perceive the punishment as disproportionately harsh.
“There are instances where India lacks comprehensive extradition treaties with certain countries, or the process of extradition is slow or politically influenced. Knowing this, some businessmen might escape to countries where they feel safe from extradition.”
In India, high-profile scams often lead to intense media scrutiny and public outcry, which can make life very uncomfortable for the accused, influencing their decision to leave the country.
After a scam, individuals might have amassed enough wealth to live comfortably abroad, especially in countries where the cost of living might be lower or where they can invest their money in new ventures without scrutiny.
Some businessmen have international connections or can blend into expatriate communities, making it easier to start anew elsewhere. These networks can provide support logistically, financially, or legally. In some cases, there might be an assumption or reality that political or bureaucratic connections could be used to influence legal outcomes. If these connections fail or if there’s a change in political power, fleeing might seem like the best option.
“There have been notable cases where individuals have successfully evaded justice by leaving the country, setting a precedent or providing a template for others to follow. This can make the idea of fleeing seem viable or even attractive.”
It’s important to note that not all Indian businessmen involved in scams choose to flee; many face the legal system. However, the combination of these factors can make absconding an appealing option for some. The situation also underscores the need for judicial and enforcement reforms to deter such behaviour and ensure justice.
