A marketing director of a company has accused some advocates of having cheated him of Rs. 5 crore on the pretext of selling him prime property in the Civil Lines area of North Delhi. They said it belonged to writer Salman Rushdie’s late father Anis Ahmed Rushdie. The complainant, Naresh Chopra, suspected that the author too might be complicit in the crime, according to the First Information Report registered by the Economic Offences Wing (EOW) of the Delhi police.
The complainant alleged that in 2005, he came across a broker named Rajinder Yadav who introduced him to lawyers H.P. Singh and Sonal Joshi, said to be practising in the Delhi High Court. The two claimed to be lawyers of “high-profile overseas clients including Mr. Rushdie, the celebrated author based in London, having high value ancestral immovable properties in Delhi and several other places.”
Mr. Singh assured Mr. Chopra that he was representing the writer and had also represented his deceased father, the late Anis Ahmed Rushdie, for several years. “He showed me a copy of the power of attorney saying that Mr. Rushdie trusts him so much that he gave him the right to conduct all his litigations back in India,” read the FIR, which further said that several times the accused had arranged conversations with Mr. Rushdie over phone.
Mr. Chopra was introduced to one Vijay Shankar Dass, who briefed him about a 5,500 square yard property in Civil Lines stating that it was owned by Anis Rushdie. However, the property was the subject matter of an ongoing litigation in the High Court on a suit filed by Bhiku Ram Jain. Assuring that the matter would be resolved soon, the accused lured Mr. Chopra in entering into a sale agreement. And over a period of time, Mr. Chopra claimed to have made payments to the tune of Rs. 5 crore, mostly in cash as allegedly demanded by the accused.
The accused insisted upon receiving money only in cash as it would be easier to evade taxes and send it across to London through other ways, he said. He purportedly paid at least two instalments in the form of demand drafts allegedly issued in the name of Mr. Rushdie.
In due course, the accused got the agreements changed at least twice in the name of showing a reduced consideration. However, they refrained from issuing any proper receipt to the complainant, he alleged.
Realising that he was being taken for a ride, he tried to get back his money and in the process, also visited London and purportedly met Mr. Dass. However, despite all the effort he did not get his money back, he alleged, adding that he later found that the property had been bequeathed to Ms. Samin Abdul Momen.
Based on the complaint, the EOW has registered a case against Vijay Shankar Dass, H.P. Singh and Sonal Joshi.
