Kishore Mehta's family blames its extended family, politicians behind arrest
In fresh development, Kishore Mehta family has made open allegations that its extended family misguided Enforcement Directorate officials and had planned Kishore Mehta's arrest.
The Mehta family handling the Lilavati Hospital Trust has brought a new twist in the Enforcement Directorate (ED) vs Kishore Mehta case.
In fresh development, Kishore Mehta family has made open allegations that its extended family misguided Enforcement Directorate officials and had planned Kishore Mehta's arrest. The family has also made a big allegation that top state and cabinet ministers are involved in this arrest plan. The family is planning to file a defamation case soon.
On November 16, 2014, the Mumbai team of ED had arrested Kishore Mehta who is a promoter and former trustee of Lilavati Hospital in connection with a foreign exchange violation case. Mehta was sent to judicial custody, but later, the local court granted him bail on a personal bond of Rs 2 lakh.
The trustees of the hospital have been divided between camps led by Prabodh Mehta, Charu Mehta and Chetan Mehta, and another team led by Kishore Mehta, Prashant Mehta, Rajiv Mehta and Rajesh Mehta.
Prashant Mehta, son of Kishore Mehta said, "There have been fights and disputes within our family since last 14 years. Now, the situation has reached at a stage, where Prabodh Mehta, Rashmi Mehta, Rekha Sheth and Chetan Mehta - all four had created a bogus case, misguided and misled the ED officials and created a non-bailable warrant (NBW) against my father - Kishore Mehta. The fact remains, it was a bogus case which is already closed."
"Top state and cabinet ministers are involved in framing and arrest of my father. We would not reveal the names of these politicians at this juncture on advice of our advocates, but we have enough substance against all. We will file a defamation case against all of them," said Rajiv Mehta, son of Kishore Mehta.
According to the agency, between 1995 and 2002, Mehta's diamond trading firm exported diamonds worth USD 20 million, but no money was ever remitted to his account. ED had registered a case against him under the (now repealed) Foreign Exchange Regulation Act (FERA) in 2002. Recently, ED got non-bailable warrant against him from the court saying that he was not responding to summons. Mehta was subsequently arrested on court-issued warrant.
The Mehta family has been arguing that allegation of Kishore Mehta did not appear before the court even after summons sent were not correct, as they had been issued against another person called Murad Lakadwala and not his client.
Earlier, in the local court during bail application hearing, Mehta's lawyer Abad Ponda had also argued that as per the ED's own official record, the summons had been issued in the wrong name and address, which is why his client never got them in the first place.
But the ED officials believe, the Mehta family is implementing, "Stratagem (a clever plot)", on the advice of their legal counsellors and trying to divert the public attention from the real foreign exchange violation case.
By definition, a stratagem is often a trick or a way to deceive an enemy or get something through a plot or ploy, but it can also mean just a great idea that outwits someone.
Indiatoday.in has in possession few official documents that indicate that the ED, Mumbai had sent two summons to Kishore Mehta in year 2001 and 2002 - which were received by Mehta, but never attended.
An affidavit filed by the ED says, "ED issued summons dated 26.11.2001, under section 40 of the FEMA Act, 1973, against the said accused (Kishore Mehta) to appear and produce the aforesaid documents before him on 29.11.2001 at 11.30 am."
The next paragraph says, "It is submitted that the said accused did not appear before the said department of the complainant (ED) on the said date and time and instead sent his letter dated 28.11.2001, showing his inability therein to appear before the complainant."
The second summon was issued on March 4, 2002 to Kishore Mehta, again. According to the affidavit in hand with Indiatoday.in, "The complainant sent another summon dated 4th March, 2002, issued under section 40 of the said section of the said Act to the accused calling upon him to appear before the complainant on 12.03.2002 at 11.30 am."
"The said summon was duly received by the above said accused with regard to the production of the aforesaid documents, papers, receipts, etc, to the complainant. Despite the receipt of the said summon, the accused herein-above did not appear before the complainant on the said date and time and once again sent another letter dated 8th March 2002, showing therein his inability to attend the office of the complainant on the above said date of the said second summon", the ED's affidavit said.
So what is Murad Lakdawala role in this case? Nothing, but there is one thing common in Murad Lakdwala (another case ED has been investigating) and Kishore Mehta's case, ie. the case number.
Please note, the C.C No of Kishore Mehta's Crystal Gems case is - 606/S/2002. This could be seen in one of the copy (which Indiatoday.in have in hand) and list of six cases - which the ED has been investigating against Kishore Mehta, his relatives and his companies.
Surprisingly, the C.C No of Murad Lakdawala case was also - 606/S/2002, in that particular year. Indiatoday.in possesses the copy of the summons of Murad Lakdawala, which was sent at his Bandra address on 27.12.2002. On the top right hand corner one can see C.C.No - 606/S/2002.
This created confusion in the Dormant of court. "Due to some negligence of court persons, the copy of summons of Murad Lakdawala got inserted or can be said got mixed up with the Kishore Mehta's case papers. It was not ED's fault, but it happened in the court itself," one ED official said.
Source said, "Case No. 606/2/2002 being dormant since 2005, the court issued the NBW one 11.11.2014 which was executed on 26.11.2014 by ED and later Kishore Mehta got arrested early morning. Now if Mehta family is trying to bring Murad Lakdawala case before the public and blaming the agency for not sending summons then it is a clever plot from their end, to keep Kishore Mehta's image clean."
Meanwhile, as per the Court's order - "the accused (Kishore Mehta) shall not leave India without prior intimation in writing to the ED at least three days in advance of his departure from India. Passport of the petitioner be returned to him forthwith after retaining xerox copies thereof ".
In addition, liberty is given to the petitioner (Mehta) to pray for quashment of the proceedings by filing separate application at any stage later on - which Mehta's family is working on.