|
|
|
Reliable legal sources whose opinion was sought by the
Central government in the St.Kitts forgery case have
revealed that the available evidence collected in the
matter strongly points to the "deep involvement" of
former prime minister P. V. Narasimha Rao. But the death
of two key witnesses will create "a legal hiatus" and
provide him an escape from criminal liability.
The two witnesses, a Canadian national, George McLean,
and a deputy director of the enforcement directorate, A.
P. Nanday, both died during the pendency Of
investigations of the Central Bureau of Investigation
(CBI).
Mr McLean, who allegedly framed the false documents to
show that ex-premier V. P. Singh's son maintained a
foreign account, died almost two years ago on September
7, 1994, and Mr Nanday, who made a confessional statement
of his alleged complicity, died on November 29,1995.
The allegation against McLean was that he fabricated
records for opening an account with withdrawal and
deposit slips along with signatures of Mr Ajeya Singh as
account opener and Mr V. P. Singh as beneficiary of In
the very first instance, of $21 million deposited In the
First Trust Corporation Ltd. in the Caribbean tax haven
of St. Kitts.
The CBI's FIR stated that a criminal conspiracy had been
hatched during 1989 by Chandraswami alias Nemichand Jain
and his secretary, Kailasnath Aggarwal, alias Mamaji at
the alleged behest of two "politically powerful persons",
be-sides senior officials of the external affairs
ministry and enforcement directorate.
The case against McLean, who committed offences under the
Indian Peal Code, cannot be tried In India as the events
relating to the alleged conspiracy occurred outside. He
as a foreigner cannot he held criminally liable for
offences committed outside India. The law Is quite clear
that a foreigner cannot be tried In this country for an
offending act committed outside India.
Mr Nanday, who went to the U.S. and St. Kitts to collect
incriminating documents, was himself a suspect. He was
arrested by the CBI and was said to have made a
confessional statement Implicating several persons. This
key evidence Involving several people Is now lost
following his death In 1995.
The prosecution's case as presented by the CBI is that
there was a conspiracy hatched in India in pursuance of
which documents were fabricated and published in a
Kuwaiti newspaper, Arab Times to the effect that Mr V. p.
Singh was a beneficiary of his son's account In dollars
at St. Kitts.
This piece of news was picked up by Indian newspapers,
some of which even published a photostat of an account
Opening form with the signatures of Ajeya Singh and Mr V.
P. Singh.
Another Indian newspaper went to the extent of publishing
a statement Of the account showing deposits and
withdrawals from December 1986 to February, 1988, when
the account was allegedly closed.
On the basis of these published newspaper reports the
enforcement directorate made inquiries with Ajeya Singh.
Thereafter, Mr. Nanday was sent to the U.S. and St. Kitts
for recovering the documents purported to have been
genuine ones.
The sources said what has turned out in the inquiry was
"a complete frame-up". Mr Nanday knew before he left
Indian shores that he was going to bring some documents
which were fabricated.
Mr Narasimha Rao, then external affairs minister, was
coincidentally in New York when Mr. Nanday went there.
Chandraswami and Mamaji were also there during the same
days In September-October, 1989.
There is evidence to show that Mr Narasimha Rao made
phone calls from his hotel room to Olympia Towers where
Chandraswami and Mamaji resided. Olympia Towers was
owned by the Saudi wheeler-dealer, Mr Adnan Khashoggi.
The allegation against Mr Rao was that he prevailed Upon
the then consul general in New York, R. K. Rai, to
authenticate the fabricated documents as having been.
recovered from McLean. Mr Rao wanted Mr. Rai to
authenticate the documents himself without the presence
of McLean, which was against the rules of procedure.
Fortunately for the prosecution, the oral and documentary
evidence, which may be used to implicate Mr. Narasimha
Rao, appears to be Intact. Mr. Rai, who authenticated
the documents in the absence of McLean, will have to
explain his conduct.
If the consul-general chooses to dispense with the
attendance of McLean at the time of attestation because
of Mr. Rao's pressure, Mr Rai will have to state so. With
regard to telephone calls which were made from the plaza
Hotel, where Mr. Rao stayed, to Olympia Towers, where
Chandraswami and Mamaji lived, these can be easily traced
from the records.
Mr. Rai attested the documents that were allegedly shown
to him by Mr. Nanday. The question that legal pundits
are asking Is whether Mr. Rao knew the nature of the
documents and thereby exposed his Involvement. Or was he
persuaded by some other persons Involved in the
conspiracy to Interfere and use his 'authoritative
position' to get the documents authenticated, while at
the same time keeping McLean out of the picture?
A consul general, by attesting the signature, merely
satisfies himself that the person who ha, signed is a
genuine person who has signed In his presence.
With both McLean and Nanday dead, the prospects of the
prosecution mounting a credible case is fading and its
case therefore is bound to suffer greatly. Such a
situation will enable Mr Rao to go scotfree because
neither McLean nor Nanday are alive to testify that
Chandraswami and Mamaji were present in New York at the
same time as the then external affairs minister.
 |
||
|
||
|
||
