Countering the BJP’s allegation that former Reserve Bank of India Governor Raghuram Rajan had identified 2006 to 2008 as the period when most bad loans originated, the Congress said here on Tuesday that such loans, or non-performing assets, of public sector banks were a “controllable” ₹2.83 lakh crore when the United Progressive Alliance demitted office in May 2014 but now it had gone up to ₹12 lakh crore.
The Congress alleged that Mr. Rajan’s written deposition to the Lok Sabha Estimates Committee, headed by Murli Manohar Joshi, showed how the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) under Narendra Modi did not act on fraudsters like alleged Punjab National Bank scam mastermind Mehul Choksi despite being alerted to the illegalities.
“Let me read page 3 of his report: ‘The RBI set up a fraud monitoring cell when I was Governor to coordinate the early reporting of fraud cases to the investigative agencies. I also sent a list of high-profile cases to the PMO urging that we coordinate action to bring at least one or two to book. I am not aware of progress on this front.’ Raghuram Rajan has indicted the Prime Minister and the PMO on the frauds being committed and fraudsters escaping,” Congress spokesperson Randeep Surjewala said.
“As per our information, Raghuram Rajan’s list had Nirav Modi [the fugitive diamond merchant] and Mehul Choksi. The PMO should clarify why it didn’t act against them.”
Mr. Rajan had sent a 17-page note on India’s banking sector after the Estimates Committee of the Lok Sabha asked him to give his views on the NPAs. His submission to the parliamentary panel, however, has now become a political debate.
‘Why the delay?’
Attacking the government over the PNB scam masterminds Mr. Choksi and Mr. Nirav Modi, Mr. Surjewala alleged that though a number of criminal complaints against the duo had been registered since May 2015, the Finance Ministry apprised the PMO of action only in March.
“Why did the PMO wait till March 1, 2018 to get a report on the fraud by Nirav Modi, Mehul Choksi? Does it not prove their complicity in the matter,” Mr. Surjewala asked.
