[Archived] Mrs D facing criminal charges

[philipl]

Non-story.

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

"All the 15 accused named by the Maharashtra Pollution Control Board in a criminal case it filed against Lavasa Corporation were issued process by the Chief Judicial Magistrate (Pune), Mr N.T. Ghadge, on Thursday.

"In the order, all accused — including non-executive directors Ms Anuradha Desai, Mr Aniruddha Deshpande, Mr Gautam Thapar and Mr Vithal Maniyar — have been directed to appear in the Pune Court on January 30 and obtain bail. If they do not, they could be jailed, a legal expert who did not wish to be named said. The police will start serving summons to the accused over the next two months."

This happened today- yes it has been around for a while but a criminal case has now been filed.

[Tony Diamond Inc]

"All the 15 accused named by the Maharashtra Pollution Control Board in a criminal case it filed against Lavasa Corporation were issued process by the Chief Judicial Magistrate (Pune), Mr N.T. Ghadge, on Thursday.

"In the order, all accused — including non-executive directors Ms Anuradha Desai, Mr Aniruddha Deshpande, Mr Gautam Thapar and Mr Vithal Maniyar — have been directed to appear in the Pune Court on January 30 and obtain bail. If they do not, they could be jailed, a legal expert who did not wish to be named said. The police will start serving summons to the accused over the next two months."

This happened today- yes it has been around for a while but a criminal case has now been filed.

Yeah, this will have no impact on Rovers

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[Baz]

Fit & Proper Persons Test - From the Premier League website:

DIRECTORS

Disqualifying Events

2. A Person shall be disqualified from acting as a Director and no Club shall be permitted to have

any Person acting as a Director of that Club if:

2.1 either directly or indirectly he is involved in or has any power to determine or influence

the management or administration of another Club or Football League club; or

2.2 either directly or indirectly he holds or acquires any Significant Interest in a Club while he

either directly or indirectly holds any interest in any class of Shares of another Club; or

2.3 he becomes prohibited by law from being a Director; or

2.4 he has a conviction (which is not a Spent Conviction) imposed by a court of the United

Kingdom or a competent court of foreign jurisdiction:

2.4.1 in respect of which an unsuspended sentence of at least 12 months’

imprisonment was imposed; or

2.4.2. in respect of any offence involving any act which would reasonably be

considered to be dishonest (and, for the avoidance of doubt, irrespective of the

actual sentence imposed); or

2.4.3 in respect of an offence set out in the Appendix 12 Schedule of Offences or a

directly analogous offence in a foreign jurisdiction (and, for the avoidance of

doubt, irrespective of the actual sentence imposed); or

2.5 he makes an Individual Voluntary Arrangement or becomes the subject of an Interim

Bankruptcy Restriction Order, a Bankruptcy Restriction Order or a Bankruptcy Order; or

2.6 he is or has been a Director of a Club which, while he has been a Director of it, has

suffered 2 or more unconnected Events of Insolvency; or

2.7 he has been a Director of 2 or more Clubs or clubs each of which, while he has been a

Director of them, has suffered an Event of Insolvency.

Change of Director’s Circumstances

6. Upon the happening of an event which affects any statement contained in a submitted

Declaration:

6.1 the Director in respect of whom the Declaration has been made shall forthwith give full

written particulars thereof to his Club and

6.2 the Club shall thereupon give such particulars in writing to the Secretary.

Disqualification of a Director

7. Upon the Board becoming aware by virtue of the submission of a Declaration or in the

circumstances referred to in Rule D.6 or by any other means that a person is liable to be

disqualified as a Director under the provisions of Rule D.2, the Board will:

7.1 give written notice to the person that he is disqualified, giving reasons therefor, and (in

the case of a person who is a Director) require him forthwith to resign as a Director; and

7.2 give written notice to the Club that the person is disqualified, giving reasons therefor,

and (in the case of a person who is a Director) in default of the Director’s resignation, it

shall procure that within 28 days of receipt of such notice the Director is removed from

his office as such.

Yeah, this will have no impact on Rovers

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Unfortunately, I agree.

[Majiball]

Yeah, this will have no impact on Rovers

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

On the plus side of she does go down the river she'll soon learn the pecking order.

[BuckyRover]

Nothing will come from this.

Imo

[philipl]

No, it just probably is.

The company Mrs D owns (Venky's) has a small stake in a construction project that is alledged to have committed some environmental offences. She is named automatically along with the heads of all the other companies with stakes in the project because she is top of the food chain. All she has to do is show that she didn't know these offences were being committed. I don't see that being difficult whatever the truth is, do you?

That is it.

She is a Director.

Directoral responsibilities in India are not dissimilar to those in the UK.

Therefore she carries joint and several personal responsibility for the activities of the company of which she is a director. Hence the criminal charges on her personally.

[CrazyIvan]

The truth is that the likelihood of this charge ending up affecting Rovers and Venky's ownership is pretty slight. There's a political game going on with regard to this situation that is blatantly apparent when you read the articles. Don't hold out hope that Venky's will be got rid of in the short term because of the situation in India. That is very, very unlikely to happen.

[Tony Diamond Inc]

She is a Director.

Directoral responsibilities in India are not dissimilar to those in the UK.

Therefore she carries joint and several personal responsibility for the activities of the company of which she is a director. Hence the criminal charges on her personally.

Whilst I admire your tenacity on this cause, I think if you look at the long game, any action taken against Mrs D. would be at best a mild tremor on the current situation.

My hope is that the owners are forced to sell long before any nudging by the lawmakers.

[Brownie]

Foes that the fact she is a non executive director not lessen the seriousness of the charges towards Mrs D ?

[philipl]

Facing a 5 years prison sentence.

Yes sure rescuing Rovers from relegation is going to be top of her priorities now.

Does that the fact she is a non executive director not lessen the seriousness of the charges towards Mrs D ?

Under English Law, there is no distinction between being a non-exec and an exec director.

Being non-exec might cause the Court to consider her less culpable but on the otherhand the Court might look at that 5% shareholding and decide she had a very real pecuniary interest in the alleged law breaking.

[Mc Love]

I guess what will all want to know, what impact could this place on the January transfer window? Possible funds to replace Kean?

[2PAC 4 Blackburn]

No doubt with their money they will have the best lawyer to work their way out anyway. Anyone know if the India justice system is partial to the odd back hander? I can't imagine someone of their wealth ending up in jail over this. Not defending them at all, just sayin...

[winstonsmith]

DIRECTORS

Disqualifying Events

2. A Person shall be disqualified from acting as a Director and no Club shall be permitted to have

any Person acting as a Director of that Club if:

2.4 he has a conviction (which is not a Spent Conviction) imposed by a court of the United

Kingdom or a competent court of foreign jurisdiction

The PL may be able to disqualify someone from acting as a director of a PL club if convicted in India. However, although Annie appears to be a director of Lavasa Corporation and the chairperson and a director of Venky's, is she is a director of BRFC?. If not, the PL would not be able to intervene on that basis.*

However it would not be too surprising if Rovers were to become even less of a concern to the 'family' than they have been previously.

* I think I may have got this wrong! After checking the Rules of the PL, it does now seem to me that the PL could intervene on this basis as the definition of Director under section D 1.10 includes "a person in accordance with whose directions or instructions the directors of the club are accustomed to act, or a person having control over the club"

[philipl]

I believe Mrs D is listed on her own as the responsible person for the owners of Rovers seeing as none of the ultimate owners are on the Board.

Nixon coverage in the Mirror

[EwoodDawn]

Just watching sky (non-sports) news and the reporter is revealing the 'endemic corruption in the Indian system' that means that charity food relief isn't getting to the people who need it. 'Endemic corruption', eh? What chance do we have?

[AggyBlue]

The Premier League don't need to worry about any revelations regarding Venky's, they can just sit back and watch us slide into the Championship.

[PAFELL]

This is one fantastic own goal by venkys. Better than any protest could achieve. Qatar contact the prem now, then rovers, buy the club. Prem force the sale. NOW

[USABlue]

Well if her being convicted means they have to give up the reins then all I have to say is throw away the key.

[Mc Love]

Can anyone see the Prince's trust withdrawing their support? We have a chairperson that is involved in criminal proceedings and a manager that was involved in a DUI offence. Surprised there wasnt more pressure put on the owners to remove him.

[glen9mullan]

Can anyone see the Prince's trust withdrawing their support? We have a chairperson that is involved in criminal proceedings and a manager that was involved in a DUI offence. Surprised there wasnt more pressure put on the owners to remove him.

I do think this is a route that someone could go down, We already have one sponsor showing concern, and the bad press etc cannot be good for the Princes Trust, although as they technically get free advertisement I don't know how they would react?

Think its certainly worth someone with good writing skills to make contact with them and put across the supporters concerns and ask what their feeling were surrounding their continual affiliation to the club

[rebelmswar]

FFS they should just give up on life now.

[Mc Love]

I do think this is a route that someone could go down, We already have one sponsor showing concern, and the bad press etc cannot be good for the Princes Trust, although as they technically get free advertisement I don't know how they would react?

Think its certainly worth someone with good writing skills to make contact with them and put across the supporters concerns and ask what their feeling were surrounding their continual affiliation to the club

I am all for that but if we did contact them, it would have to be the right person on the Prince's Trust. they have an email address [email protected] but if you did write something, would it reach the right person?

[Paul]

I've known about this for weeks, just found it when I was googling a number of phrases and words connected with the Raos / Venkys.

While I don't doubt the seriousness of the impact on the local environment etc the legal action is a non-story. Think about the countless times the rich and powerful find themselves in embarrassing legal positions. It's very rare for these people to be convicted and more so jailed. If found guilty it will be a slap on the wrists but my guess is the lawyers will prove Mrs D did not know of the offences and is therefore innocent.

Quote from the local media:

"it says every person who, at the time the offence was committed, was directly in charge of, and was responsible to as well as the company, are liable. The liability will not apply if they prove that the offence was committed without their knowledge or that they exercised all due diligence to prevent the commission of such offence. Company officials too are liable if the offence is attributable to any neglect on the part of any director, manager, secretary or other officers of the company."

I can think of a few crimes Mrs D could be found guilty of but this isn't one of them. How about gross neglect and mistreatment of a football club!!!!!!

[philipl]

I've known about this for weeks, just found it when I was googling a number of phrases and words connected with the Raos / Venkys.

While I don't doubt the seriousness of the impact on the local environment etc the legal action is a non-story. Think about the countless times the rich and powerful find themselves in embarrassing legal positions. It's very rare for these people to be convicted and more so jailed. If found guilty it will be a slap on the wrists but my guess is the lawyers will prove Mrs D did not know of the offences and is therefore innocent.

Quote from the local media:

"it says every person who, at the time the offence was committed, was directly in charge of, and was responsible to as well as the company, are liable. The liability will not apply if they prove that the offence was committed without their knowledge or that they exercised all due diligence to prevent the commission of such offence. Company officials too are liable if the offence is attributable to any neglect on the part of any director, manager, secretary or other officers of the company."

I can think of a few crimes Mrs D could be found guilty of but this isn't one of them. How about gross neglect and mistreatment of a football club!!!!!!

Proving that Paul is going to take a lot of lawyers and a bucket load of time. After all, as a Director, it was her job to know- the offences seem to be pretty well core to Lavasa' raison d'etre.

Time spent with lawyers and fretting over this is time we desperately need her to be spending on learning the abc of owning/running a football club sitting 19th in the PL.

This criminal case happening now is another enormous body blow to Rovers.

[miqaayil]

Guys... this is a non-starter ... unless the prince-trust, WEC and QP push the FA ... then there will be movement ... if they wait for the court date or verdict ... it will take a decade or more....