Political pressure shielded family from investigation into disproportionate assets, says petitioner
Mumbai The Bombay high court, while hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking a probe by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and Enforcement Directorate (ED) into the alleged disproportionate assets amassed by Uddhav Thackeray and his family, has posted the hearing for November 16.
During the hearing, the division bench of Justice S V Gangapurwala and Justice R N Laddha was informed that the registry had raised some objections to the petition and hence should be granted two weeks to rectify them. The bench permitted this and said the PIL would be heard after the petitioner had corrected the mistakes in it.
The petition, which has been filed by Dadar resident Gouri Bhide (38), claims that the Thackeray family, including Uddhav, his wife Rashmi, son and former state minister Aaditya and younger son Tejas, has assets disproportionate to its known sources of income and is also involved in money-laundering. “Huge properties and assets worth crores have been accumulated by the family in Mumbai and Raigad district,” says the petition, which points out that “holding an official post in any political party by itself cannot be a legal source of income”. “Similarly, holding the constitutional posts of chief minister and cabinet minister in any state also is not a source of income, as the remuneration is limited,” the petition adds.
Bhide, who claims that she was inspired to file the PIL by the ‘Na khaoonga na khaane doonga’ slogan of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, has sought directions from the court to the investigating agencies to conduct a thorough and impartial investigation.
The petition further states that though the Thackeray family had accumulated ‘benami property’, the police had failed to take action against the serious economic offences and charges of corruption due to political pressure. It also alleged that the family was guilty of violating the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Representation of Peoples Act.
The petition also refers to the recent raids conducted by the CBI, ED, and income tax department in Maharashtra on several people close to the Thackeray family, who were still on the radar of the central agencies. The petition concludes that it is “crystal clear” that the huge undisclosed properties, cash and other wealth found on those under the scanner had a “close nexus” with Thackeray family members.
The petitioner states that she had submitted a complaint relating to the above facts on July 11 and a reminder on July 26 to the Mumbai police, but no action was taken and the complaint was only forwarded by the police commissioner to the Economic Offences Wing (EOW).
As another example of alleged corruption, the petition states that during the pandemic while the entire print media reported losses, the Shiv Sena mouthpiece ‘Saamna’ and ‘Marmik’ magazine showed a turnover of ₹42 crore and recorded a profit of ₹11.5 crore. This, alleges the petitioner, was a case of turning black money into white, as both publications were never subjected to an audit by the Audit Bureau of Circulation, as the print order is not known. Bhide states that, like the Thackerays, her family was in the printing business and had briefly printed supplements of the late Bal Thackeray’s weekly during the Emergency.
The PIL further states that according to information received by the petitioner, Prabodhan Prakashan, a public trust, and Prabodhan Prakashan Pvt Ltd is owned by the Thackeray family as the “sole operating agency”. The family’s trusted lieutenants are its trustees and it is not in the public domain. “However, the operating growth of the company is astonishing,” says the petition.
The petition concludes with a reference to the changes in the shareholding pattern of the company which will benefit Tejas Thackeray, a new shareholder.
The PIL seeks direction to the central agencies to take cognisance of the complaint with the Mumbai police and investigate it. It also asked that the status of the probe be submitted to the court every month.