Janani Bank scam: Prime accused arrested in Kovelakuntla
CI Hanumantha Naik confirmed that Venkataramana, a native of Somavandlapalle in YSR Kadapa district, was taken into custody and remanded to judicial custody, during a press conference here on Monday.
He explained that four years ago, Venkataramana, along with Guvvala Padmavati and others, established Janani Society near Om Shanti Bhavan in Kovelakuntla. The society lured depositors from Kovelakuntla, Chagalamarri, Nandyal, and Banaganapalle with promises of high interest rates and easy loan access, surpassing private bank offerings. Investigations revealed that the society collected around Rs 1.5 crore in fixed and savings deposits, which Venkataramana diverted to his personal account. When depositors sought returns upon maturity, they found the society's premises closed and the management absconding.
Police previously arrested co-accused Guvvala Padmavati, Akula Bharadwaj, and society chairperson Sujatha. Venkataramana's arrest marks a significant breakthrough in the ongoing investigation into the scam that exploited depositors' trust.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Print
8 minutes ago
- The Print
Cyber fraud syndicate busted in Delhi; 5 held for duping people by posing as bank officials
According to the police, the gang impersonated bank employees and contacted victims under the pretext of redeeming credit card reward points. The syndicate came to light when a resident of Palam Colony lodged a complaint on June 20, stating that he was cheated of Rs 96,000 after receiving a call from a person claiming to be from a private bank. New Delhi, Aug 5 (PTI) The Delhi Police has busted a syndicate for allegedly cheating people by posing as bank employees and offering credit card rewards, officials said on Tuesday. Five people have been arrested in the case. The caller informed the complainant of partial details of his credit card and convinced him to share OTPs in the name of reward point redemption. The money was then fraudulently transferred through a mobile application into the accused's bank account, a police officer said. 'They would collect the credit card details and OTP from unsuspecting victims and transfer the defrauded money through mule bank accounts,' the officer said. 'A case was registered and an investigation was taken up. It was found that the defrauded amount was settled in a bank account and later diverted to another bank before being withdrawn. CCTV footage from ATMs showed one accused withdrawing cash with his face covered,' the officer added. Following a raid at a location in Mohan Garden, police arrested three of the accused — Atul Kumar, Sunny Kumar Singh and Kaushal Kumar. A search of the premises led to the recovery of multiple bank account kits, stamps of different firms, mobile phones and other digital gadgets. 'During interrogation, it was revealed that Kaushal Kumar, a former private bank employee, was responsible for opening multiple mule accounts. He had taken a rented premises in Mohan Garden, where he facilitated the creation of current and savings accounts. These accounts were then provided to cyber criminals through a woman who was also later arrested,' he added. Sunny Kumar Singh, a final-year CA student, helped create GST and Udyam certificates as well as email IDs for opening accounts. Atul Kumar, in whose name the firm was registered, held three bank accounts used in the fraud. The fifth accused, Md Ahmad, who previously worked in call centres, was identified as the key caller impersonating bank officials. He had been absconding and was wanted in another cyber fraud case registered earlier this year. Ahmad was arrested based on the inputs provided during interrogation. 'All accused, Md Ahmad, Kaushal Kumar, Atul Kumar, Sunny Kumar Singh, and the woman, have been arrested and further investigation is underway,' said the officer. PTI BM HIG This report is auto-generated from PTI news service. ThePrint holds no responsibility for its content.
Indian Express
8 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Why CBI closed case against former AAP Delhi Minister Satyendar Jain: No criminal activity or loss to govt
A Delhi court on Monday (August 4) accepted a closure report filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in a case against Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader and former Delhi Public Works Department (PWD) Minister Satyendar Jain relating to alleged irregularities in hiring in the Department. This was one of the first major corruption cases filed against any senior leader of the AAP. In its closure report, the CBI, after carrying out investigations for almost four years, said that it had found 'no criminal activity or wrongful loss to the government' in the case. Accepting the report, Special Judge Dig Vinay Singh of Rouse Avenue court who was hearing the case said: '…When CBI could not find any evidence of criminal conspiracy, abuse of power, pecuniary gain, or wrongful loss to the government exchequer, and the alleged acts are at most administrative irregularities, no offence under Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act or criminal conspiracy is established.' The case was related to alleged corruption in the hiring of a 17-member creative team for the PWD for various projects. An FIR was registered on May 29, 2019 after a complaint by the Delhi government's Directorate of Vigilance, which alleged that professionals were engaged in the PWD in violation of rules, and that payments were made from unrelated project funds. The complaint said that the outsourcing of professionals for PWD projects was 'allegedly irregular and lacked proper approvals from the relevant Finance Department'. The hiring 'bypassed standard recruitment procedures', and expenses were charged to unrelated projects, it said. The main accusation was that Jain and PWD officials had ignored standard hiring practices followed by the government, altered the scope of work, and manipulated the process to favour an agency named M/s Soni Detective & Allied Services Private Limited. After the FIR was registered, the CBI examined various aspects relating to the hiring such as the justification and need for hiring these professionals, the transparency (or lack of it) behind the recruitment process, approvals and use of project funds, whether any personal gain was involved, and whether legal and procedural norms were followed. And what did the investigation find? Following the investigation, the CBI concluded that the need to hire professionals was justified. It found that the hiring process had begun with an advertisement that attracted 1,700 applications for the jobs, and that the selections were based on merit. Those who were hired were paid between Rs 50,000 and Rs 1.95 lakh per month, which the CBI said was 'justified remuneration' that 'aligned with the regular earnings' of other PWD architects. The CBI had also stated that the hiring of professionals was necessary due to urgent departmental needs and that no payments beyond approved limits had been made. 'The total investigation found no criminal activity or wrongful loss to the government… No evidence of quid pro quo or conspiracy has emerged, and the acts of public servants do not constitute fraudulent conduct,' it said. The CBI also said that the agency was hired through a transparent tender advertised in newspapers, and no complaints of irregularities were received from the losing bidder. The CBI investigation concluded that the key reasons for requiring professionals stemmed from a note written by officers to the Minister back in September 2015, in which they had flagged the absence of in-house expertise and a large number of vacancies. Also, several key infrastructure projects such as smart schools, hospitals, clinics, and road redesigns were pending. The CBI noted that at the time the hirings took place, there were close to 50% vacancies in the posts of architects, and major infrastructure projects had to be executed in a time-bound manner by the Delhi government. The 'highly qualified candidates' who were hired managed 82 projects, including mohalla clinics, flyovers and elevated corridors, and anganwadis, the CBI said. The CBI concluded that there were no irregularities in recruitment, and no one had made any pecuniary gains. What other cases does Jain face? Jain is facing two other cases: one relating to alleged disproportionate assets, another relating to alleged corruption in a Rs 571 crore project to install CCTV cameras in Delhi. DA CASE: Jain is accused of amassing assets disproportionate to his known sources of income to the extent of approximately Rs 1.62 crore between February 14, 2015 and May 31, 2017 while functioning as a public servant. CCTV CASE: In March this year, the Delhi government's Anti Corruption Branch (ACB) booked Jain for allegedly accepting a bribe of Rs 7 crore to waive a penalty of Rs 16 crore imposed on Bharat Electronics Limited (BEL) which was installing CCTVs cameras in Delhi. Both cases are being heard in Delhi's Rouse Avenue court. Charges are yet to be framed in either of the two cases.
The Print
23 minutes ago
- The Print
Anil Ambani's firms were under scanner of banks & SEBI before ED tightened noose around him
One involves a company allegedly incorporated by Ambani in 2006, with employees of the Reliance Group as directors and authorised signatories, according to findings of the Securities and Exchange Board of India. The second relates to a series of loans extended by Yes Bank during the tenure of its former chairman and managing director, Rana Kapoor. New Delhi: As the Enforcement Directorate (ED) tightens the noose around Reliance Group chairman Anil Ambani in a probe into an alleged loan diversion to the tune of Rs 14,000 crore, two central elements are under scrutiny in the case. The summons came a week after the federal probe agency searched 35 locations across the country, including premises allegedly linked to him, in a money laundering case related to loans amounting to Rs 3,500 crore from Yes Bank to Reliance Commercial Finance Ltd (RCFL) and Reliance Home Finance Ltd (RHFL)—group companies of the Reliance Group, controlled by Ambani. Additionally, another major Reliance Group firm, Reliance Communications, may face action from the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) after State Bank of India reportedly flagged its account as fraudulent. A complaint to the agency is in process of being filed. An undisclosed controlled firm Ambani has been summoned for questioning in a money laundering case linked to two CBI investigations initiated in September 2022, following a complaint by bank management alleging quid pro quo transactions between Reliance firms and Rana Kapoor. The agency had booked Reliance Home Finance, Rana Kapoor and unidentified officials of these firms based on allegations that Yes Bank had invested Rs 2,965 crore in Non-Covertible Debentures of Reliance Home Finance (RHFL) between 2017 and 2019, when Kapoor was heading the bank's investment committee. These investments were later classified as non-performing assets, amounting to Rs 1,353.50 crore as of December 2019. The Yes Bank management alleged that forensic audits of these transactions revealed that the bank had invested these sums in RHFL after it extended two tranches of loans, each of Rs 60 crore, to RAB Enterprises and its 100 percent subsidiary, Bliss House, owned by Rana Kapoor's wife, Bindu Kapoor. Similarly, the bank had invested Rs 2,045 crore in NCDs with RCFL during the same period, allegedly in exchange for RCFL granting loans of two tranches, each of Rs 225 crore, to RAB Enterprises and Imagine Estate, another firm owned by Bindu Kapoor. According to the CBI FIR, Rana Kapoor did not disclose these transactions before Yes Bank made investments into these Reliance Group firms. According to officials, loans amounting to thousands of crores from banks, especially Yes Bank, were allegedly diverted through an undisclosed related party, Cresta Logistics, and ultimately reached to Anil Ambani and his family members. ThePrint reported that before searches by the ED, several financial watchdogs, including the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), shared their findings on the alleged misappropriation of loan amounts by Anil Ambani and his firms with the ED, providing fresh impetus to the investigation. The market watchdog shared the findings of its investigation related to Reliance Infrastructure, Crest Logistics, and how Ambani allegedly floated the firm to divert funds taken as a loan from banks including Yes Bank – the funds were later written off, leading to financial gains at the expense of banks, especially Yes Bank. Based on audited statements and financial records submitted by Reliance Infrastructure, the company had an exposure of Rs 9,010 crore in Crest Logistics, which increased to Rs 27,212 crore by 2022-23. The outstanding amount on Crest Logistics, according to SEBI findings, was reduced by Rs 9825 crore in the financial year 2016-17, of which Rs 7,362 crore was written off solely through book entries and provisions, and not through repayment of loans Reliance Infra had extended to the firm. SEBI noted in its findings that the majority of the Inter-Corporate Deposit (ICD) and advances extended by Reliance Infrastructure were for Crest Logistics. The firm was later renamed CLE Private Limited in December 2019. It found that Reliance Infrastructure allegedly continued to extend advances to Crest Logistics despite having made provisions for losses from these advances in its balance sheet. Between the financial years 2016-17 and 2020-21, Reliance Infrastructure wrote off Rs 10,017 crore without corresponding repayment of the advances. The write-offs were allegedly carried out through 'unexplained accounting adjustments', according to SEBI's findings. According to SEBI, the firm consistently maintained its relationship with Exel Logistics on par with several other entities providing Engineering, Procurement, and Construction (EPC) services. While the firm has maintained its financial transactions amounting to thousands of crores over the decade, it never disclosed that CLE Private Limited was a related party in its financial statements. However, an investigation by SEBI found that a firm, Reliance HR Services, held the largest stake of 41.05 percent stake in the company. The SEBI investigation also found that Yes Bank considered CLE a 100 percent subsidiary of the Anil Ambani-controlled group while extending credit between 2013 and 2018. The bank also stipulated that the shareholding structure should not change until the loan was repaid. SEBI further found that as many as six former CLE directors held equivalent positions in one or more group companies of the Reliance Group. Among them was Madhukar Moolwaney, Reliance Infra's Chief Financial Officer, was CLE's director for a decade between 2003 and 2013. The market watchdog noted Moolwaney's statement that he was made CLE's director for a decade by the 'virtue of his employment with Reliance Infra' and that the firm was indirectly controlled by Anil Ambani and his selected group of 15-20 persons. SEBI concluded that CLE made investments amounting to Rs 11,217 crore into several allegedly controlled by Anil Ambani, in which he and his family members were direct beneficiaries. However, advances , investment in preference shares and debentures by R Infra in CLE which was eventually written written off by R Infra formed the bulk source of such funds, the SEBI observed in its findings. 'CLE failed to respond to SEBI's repeated summons in this regard and failed to provide any rationale or explanation on these investments or source of funds. Similarly, R Infra failed to provide any explanation on their accounting adjustments on the outstanding of CLE, through which it wrote down over Rs. 12,035 Crore in CLE without any adequate disclosures, nor they have followed the rigors of statutory requirement with respect to related party transactions. No explanation has been offered by Mr. Anil Ambani also, whose presence is found at both the ends of the spectrum of transactions,' the SEBI observed in its investigation findings. 'Accordingly, it is concluded that the aforementioned entities were beneficiaries of the illegal diversion of funds from R Infra, the listed company, for the ultimate benefit of its promoter through a scheme of fund movements and accounting adjustments,' the watchdog documented in the finding shared with the ED. Also Read: ED issues Lookout Circular against Anil Ambani in loan fraud case, hours after summons for questioning SBI's inevitable complaint SBI sent a letter to Reliance Communications on 23 June, informing the firm that it had flagged its loan account as a potential fraud account on 13 June. This marked the second time in five years that the account had been classified as fraudulent. In November 2020, SBI had already marked the account as fraudulent and informed the Reserve Bank of India in line with its guidelines. However, in the wake of orders from the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court regarding the classification of firms and promoters accused of committing fraud, the bank reinitiated the process. In this, the SBI management issued a Show Cause Notice to Reliance Communications and Anil Ambani along with a forensic report of the firm to the directors to explain their case. Anil Ambani presented his case before the bank's Fraud Identification Committee (FIC). According to the bank's FIC, Reliance Infratel Limited (RITL) and Reliance Telecom Limited (RTL) – erstwhile subsidiaries of Reliance Communications – had received Rs 31,580 crore from banks, of which Rs 13,667 crore was used for repayment of loans. In comparison, Rs 12,692 crore was allegedly paid to connected companies. The bank pinpointed transactions such as a Rs 250 crore loan from Dena Bank in February 2017 to Reliance Communications to deal with 'short-term cash flow mismatch and payment of dues, sundry creditors'. The bank alleged that Reliance Communications passed on the loan amount to its subsidiary, Reliance Communication Infrastructure Limited (RCIL), as an ICD, while claiming that the funds were used to pay dues to BNP Paribas Bank. The bank further found that NBFC India Infrastructure Finance Company Ltd (IIFCL) sanctioned Rs 248 crore to Reliance Communications for capital expenditure, which was passed on to its subsidiaries, RITL and RIEL, in the amounts of Rs 63 crore and Rs 77 crore, respectively. The bank further alleged that there were inter-company loan transfers in which Reliance Communications transferred Rs 783.77 crore to RTL and Rs 1,435 crore to RITL from loans obtained from the banks. The Reliance Group argued before the bank that Reliance Communications always functioned as a borrowing group that included all these subsidiaries. Hence, inter-company transfer allegations were not applicable against them. The bank committee, on the other hand, asserted that these firms had not made the transfers directly but routed them through associates and other subsidiaries, raising suspicions that those transactions were sham and allegedly carried out through the manipulation of the books of accounts, ultimately to misappropriate funds. Union Minister of State for Finance Pankaj Chaudhary informed the Lok Sabha on 22 July that SBI had an exposure of around Rs 3,000 crore in Reliance Communications. This included the principal outstanding amount of Rs. 2,227.64 crore, along with accrued interest and expenses as of 26 August, 2016, and a bank guarantee of Rs 786.52 crore. 'On 24.06.2025, the bank has reported classification of fraud to RBI, and is also in the process of lodging a complaint with CBI,' he further informed the Lower House just a day before the ED started conducting raids on premises linked to his companies that lasted for four days. (Edited by Sugita Katyal) Also Read: 'Corruption follows those in power like shadow'—HC rejects IAS officer's anticipatory bail in bribery case
