Satyam Scam: Special Court Issues Notices Over ‘Fake’ Land Mutations in Janwada
After hearing Immaneni Rama Rao, counsel for the petitioner, the court directed issuance of notices to all respondents concerned and posted the matter to January 27 for further consideration, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the allegations.
Hyderabad: A Special Court here on Monday issued notices to the accused in the Satyam Computers scam case and the officials in a new petition that alleged that there were fake and fabricated mutations over land transactions in Janwada. These land parcels were to notified as proceeds of crime as per the Prevention of Money Laundering Act but had not been done so due to mischief, the petition alleged.
The court was hearing an implead petition filed by Abhinav Alladi arising out of the Satyam Computer fraud case, seeking that the court record his statement on the land details.
The petitioner, claiming to be an intervening informant and a person having an interest in the property, alleged that substantial proceeds of crime generated from the Satyam Computers fraud were diverted for acquisition of large extents of immovable properties in and around Hyderabad.
He contended that while the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) had taken note of several such transactions, certain acquisitions, particularly land at Janwada village, Shankarpally mandal, were not adequately examined during its investigation. According to the petitioner, these land parcels were originally recorded in the names of Madan Gopal and Shyamlal as per Khasra and pahani records spanning from the 1950s to 1990s, but were later fraudulently mutated in favour of accused persons without due legal process.
According to him, the land measuring about 3.1 acres in Survey No. 311/1, Account No. 60699, at Janwada, along with extensive land parcels in Survey No.s 306 to 316, were fraudulently acquired in the guise of legitimate transactions by Shatabisha company and its director, which were linked to Satyam Computers.
The petitioner alleged that the accused, in conspiracy with public servants and political functionaries, manipulated revenue records and routed proceeds of crime through benami transactions, resulting in multiple illegal transfers of land involving enormous monetary value. The petitioner submitted that he had entered into agreements with the original owners and had paid substantial consideration, thereby claiming to be a victim of the alleged fraud.
After hearing Immaneni Rama Rao, counsel for the petitioner, the court directed issuance of notices to all respondents concerned and posted the matter to January 27 for further consideration, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the allegations.
