An appellate tribunal has upheld the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) 2020 order to attach a Mumbai flat belonging to former ICICI Bank MD and CEO Chanda Kochhar and her husband Deepak Kochhar. The decision comes in connection with an alleged money laundering case linked to a Rs 300 crore loan sanctioned to the Videocon Group.
In its July 3 order, the tribunal stated that there was “substance” in the ED’s allegation of “quid pro quo” in the sanctioning of the loan to Videocon International Electronics Ltd (VIEL). The tribunal noted that following the loan disbursement, Rs 64 crore was transferred by the Videocon Group to NuPower Renewables Pvt Ltd (NRPL), a company owned by Deepak Kochhar.
The loan was cleared by a sanctioning committee of ICICI Bank between June 2009 and October 2011, of which Chanda Kochhar was a member in her capacity as MD and CEO.
ED’s Case Based on CBI FIR; Tribunal Cites ‘Total Inter-fixing’ of Businesses
The ED’s money laundering case, rooted in a CBI FIR, alleges that Chanda Kochhar conspired to defraud ICICI Bank by abusing her official position. Probe agencies claimed she received undue benefit through her husband from Videocon Group promoter V N Dhoot.
ALSO READ: ‘We are in shame’: Supreme Court on Odisha student self-immolation case
The property attached by the ED includes flat no. 45 in CCI Chambers, Churchgate, Mumbai — valued at several crores — and Rs 10.5 lakh in cash seized from another of Deepak Kochhar’s companies. The ED claimed the flat was purchased using funds from the Rs 64 crore transaction, calling it proceeds of crime.
While the PMLA Adjudicating Authority had rejected the attachment in November 2020, the appellate tribunal has now overruled that decision. “We find a prima facie case against the respondents for commission of the offence of money laundering,” the tribunal said.
Rejecting Chanda Kochhar’s argument that she was unaware of her husband’s business activities, the tribunal remarked that she was expected to act in accordance with the rules and policy of ICICI Bank and could not plead ignorance. It also dismissed her claim that the loan sanction was a collective decision and not attributable to her individually, stating that the ED had presented a complete chain of events.
Upholding the ED’s action, the tribunal concluded, “The provisional attachment order dated 10.01.2020 for the properties other than for Rs 10.5 lakh is confirmed.”
