In a significant ruling in the high-profile case of Videocon loan, an appellate court has held ex-ICICI Bank CEO Chanda Kochhar guilty of receiving a ₹64 crore bribe in lieu of sanctioning a ₹300 crore loan to the Videocon Group.
In a judgment dated July 3, the tribunal held that the ₹64 crore deal was a quintessential case of quid pro quo—exchange of benefits under an agreement arranged by Deepak Kochhar, Kochhar's husband, through a Videocon Group-related company.
The history of appellants (ED) has been presented and substantiated by the evidence in light of the reference of the statements under Section 50 of the PMLA Act which are admissible and can be acted upon," the tribunal noted.
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) had charged that Chanda Kochhar had not disclosed an apparent conflict of interest when she was part of the bank's loan sanction process. The tribunal agreed with this perception, saying that the ₹300 crore loan sanctioned by ICICI Bank to Videocon was in contravention of the institution's internal governance guidelines.
One of the central features of the case is the ₹64 crore that was routed from Videocon's business, Supreme Energy Pvt Ltd (SEPL), to NuPower Renewables Pvt Ltd (NRPL)—Deepak Kochhar's company—just a day after the loan had been sanctioned. Although NRPL was nominally owned by Videocon's head, Venugopal Dhoot, the tribunal emphasized that control over operations lay with Deepak Kochhar, who was also the managing director.
The charges hold merit supported by evidence and the statements made under Section 50 of the PMLA Act," the tribunal remarked, terming the financial trail clear evidence of a quid pro quo agreement.
The tribunal also ruled that Chanda Kochhar violated ICICI Bank's conflict of interest regulations for not reporting her husband's commercial relationship with the loan borrower, Videocon.
The tribunal gave a stinging rebuke to the adjudicating authority's 2020 ruling of releasing assets worth ₹78 crore that were earlier seized from Kochhar and her allies. It termed the previous order flawed and deficient in adequate scrutiny of evidence.
"The adjudicating authority turned a blind eye to vital material facts and formed opinions inconsistent with the record. Hence, we cannot approve its findings," said the tribunal in its ruling.
The panel upheld the ED's action, declaring that the property attachments were backed by cogent documents and a properly detailed chronology of events. In the view of the tribunal, the chain of events—from approval of the loan to the transfer of funds and diversion into a company belonging to Kochhar's spouse—evinced a serious abuse of authority and an egregious violation of ethics.
Read also| India’s Exports to US Jump 23% in June, Imports See 10% Decline
