Bofors: Hinduja claim lends new twist

By Mukund Padmanabhan

CHENNAI, SEPT. 28. The Bofors case has taken a startling twist with the Hindujas, the NRI industrialist family, claiming that the Swiss Investigating Judge has clarified that the money paid to them by the Swedish arms manufacturer had no relation to the infamous 155 mm howitzer contract.

Mr. Srichand Hinduja has claimed that this information is in the process of being transmitted by the CBI and has hoped that this ``further evidence'' will convince the CBI of the ``non- involvement'' of the Hinduja brothers in the Bofors case.

Mr. Hinduja's claim could have a huge bearing on the Bofors investigation if his statement on what the Swiss Investigating Judge, Mr. Perraudin, said, is confirmed. The information the judge was expected to provide to the CBI was regarded as essential for filing a chargesheet in the case against three Hinduja brothers (Srichand, Gopichand and Prakash) or to use the CBI's own expression ``to reach a logical conclusion.''

It was in June 9 this year that the CBI sought further clarifications from the Swiss authorities in connection with the Swiss bank documents the agency received in December 1999. The documents related to the Hindujas Swiss bank accounts.

The CBI had sought the clarifications principally because although the Swiss bank documents showed 9 separate payments made by Bofors of a little over 80 million Swedish Kroner (SKR) into three Hinduja code-named accounts (Lotus, Tulip and Mont Blanc), they did not specifically mention or reveal that these amounts were commissions paid in respect to the Indian howitzer contract.

In contrast, the other batch of Swiss bank documents - which related to the Mr. Win Chaddha-fronted Svenska Limited and the Mr. Ottavio Quattrocchi-fronted AE Services - had made the connection between the Bofors payments and the howizter contract quite clear.

Documents available with The Hindu reveal that the CBI had requested for eight different sets of documentation from the Swiss authorities which the agency claimed is ``required for reaching a logical conclusion.'' Most of the requested additional information concerns the Panamanian-registered and Hinduja-owned McIntyre Corporation in whose three code-named accounts (Mont Blanc at Credit Suisse, Lotus at Manufacturers Hanover Trust and Tulip at Swiss Bank Corporation) the nine payments were made by Bofors between 22-05-1986 and 18-12-1986.

The information sought included details about ``subsequent transfers from the three code-named accounts'' until ``the said amounts were transferred out of Swiss jurisdiction,'' documents showing the details of beneficial owners of McIntyre Corporation and advice slips from the bankers of Bofors transferring money into the three accounts.

Further information was sought about an account (No. 229-ARAB) in the name of Srichand and Gopichand Hinduja in Manufacturer Hanover Trust which was abruptly closed or cancelled and did not reflect any transactions. The CBI wanted to know whether this cancelled account had any link with the account opened later (No 229 ARAB-Tulip) into which Bofors payments were made.

While expressing gratitude for the documents it received from the Swiss, the CBI's additional request noted that ``more documents which were relevant to the Letter Rogatory were not made available'' and that these are ``relevant to the investigation.'' The CBI letter was routed through the Indian Embassy in Berne, from where it reached the Investigating Judge on June 14 via the Swiss Federal Office of Police.

The Hindujas have admitted ownership of McIntyre Corporation and the fact that nine payments were made by Bofors into the code- named accounts. Their differences have narrowed down to the question of whether these payments were related to the Indian howitzer contract, which they continue to strongly deny.

What impact the Swiss Investigating Judge's supposed communication to the effect that there was no evidence of any such relation will have on the CBI's plan to file an additional chargesheet in the Bofors case remains to be seen. But the revelation promises to spark off a new and quite unexpected debate on the Bofors case.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : Front Page
Previous : Abducted asst. director reaches Gajanur
Next     : Hinduja clarifies