 "Will submit replies to court, YSRCP rebel MP on CBI charge sheet")
A day after the CBI filed a charge sheet against rebel MP of YSR Congress party (YSRCP) K Raghu Rama Krishna Raju, his company Ind-Barath Power (Madras) Limited and 15 others in connection with Rs 947. 71 crore loan fraud, he said on Saturday that he would file his reply to the court on all issues raised in the charge sheet.
The MP believes that filing of the charge sheet at this stage augurs well as the matter was pending for the last four years.
Stating that entire transactions happened through banks, he said they were informed about the outstanding dues from some companies. He called it a civil dispute between the companies and said he would file a counter with clarity.
He remarked there was no need to give any importance to the comments of those who will soon be going to jail. He was apparently referring to the reaction of some YSRCP leaders.
The CBI on Friday filed a charge sheet against Raju, then chairman and managing director of Ind-Barath and others for allegedly causing loss of Rs 947.71 crore to a consortium of lenders.
Ind-Barath's eight sister companies, then director Madhusudahan Reddy, Sekeo Power Limited, its managing director and two chartered accountants M. Srinivasulu Reddy and Pravin Kumar Jabad were also named in the charge sheet.
More From This Section
The Economic Offences Wing of the Delhi police had registered the case in October 2018 against five persons, including a Hyderabad-based company and its directors. The CBI took over the probe into the case in April 2019 on the orders of the central government.
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) investigation revealed that Ind-Barath through its chairman and managing director Raju had allegedly availed Rs 947.71 crore from a consortium of lenders led by Power Finance Corporation Limited (PFC) and two other lenders, Rural Electrification Corporation Ltd (REC) and India Infrastructure Finance Company Limited (IIFCL), for setting up a thermal power plant at Tuticorin in Tamil Nadu.
However, the company neither completed the project nor complied with the terms and conditions of loan agreements. The accused, including the borrower company, allegedly transferred/diverted the disbursed project funds to create fixed deposits with Bank of India and UCO Bank and to pay advances to contractors.
--IANS
ms/shb/