By G. Sharmila
Ananda Krishnan
Maxis Communications Bhd (MCB) has denied any allegation of wrongdoing with regard to charges filed against tycoon Ananda Krishnan and Maxis director Ralph Marshall in India over telecommunications deals done in that country.
“MCB firmly believes that the allegations are totally unfounded and the charge-sheet has been filed without basis,” the company said in the statement today.
MCB is the holding company for Bursa Malaysia-listed Maxis Berhad.
Explaining this further, MCB said that it understood from various Indian media reports that India’s Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) had approached the Malaysian government through the Letters Rogatory as part of its investigations.
“Apparently, the CBI in its status reports to the Supreme Court of India has also stated that the Letters Rogatory have not been complied with. The CBI has, it appears, elected to proceed with the charge sheet instead of properly completing its investigations with Malaysia in accordance with Malaysian and Indian law.
“The CBI also appears to have disregarded the numerous representations sent by MCB. Therefore, it is apparent that the charge-sheet has been filed on the basis of incomplete investigations,” MCB said in its statement.
MCB said that it learned from Indian media reports last Friday that the CBI has filed a charge sheet “in relation to the perceived irregularities in MCB’s acquisition of Aircel Limited (Aircel) from Siva Ventures Limited (SVL) in 2006.”
According to MCB, the charge sheet names:
1. Dayanidhi Maran (the Minister of Communications & Information Technology India, from May 2004 to May 2007);
2. Kalanidhi Maran;
3. T. Ananda Krishnan (MCB’s controlling shareholder)
4. Ralph Marshall, a director of MCB;
5. Sun Direct TV Pvt Ltd (Sun Direct);
6. Astro All Asia Networks Plc (AAAN);
7. MCB;
8. South Asia Entertainment Holdings Ltd,; and
9. Dr. J.S. Sarma, deceased
It cites the commission of offences punishable under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code (criminal conspiracy) read with Sections 7, 12 and 13 (1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (specifically, that of a public servant accepting gratification and abetment of that offence and criminal misconduct of a public servant).
The company said that based on CBI’s press statement on August 29th and ensuing media reports, that the charge-sheet was premised on the CBI’s findings following its investigations made into a complaint by C. Sivasankaran, the promoter of SVL. The complaint was that Dayanidhi Maran had allegedly abused his position and constricted the business environment of Aircel between 2004 and 2005 with an intent to coerce SVL to sell Aircel to MCB.
“It is further alleged that as consideration for this favour received by MCB, AAAN paid illegal gratifications to Sun Direct in the garb of purchase of its shares at a premium, and to South Asia FM Limited,” MCB said.
MCB said that it had not been served with a copy of the charge-sheet and that it had cooperated with the CBI’s investigations over the past three years.
“MCB has also sent numerous representation letters, setting out the facts and documents rebutting the allegations against it and which would have led to only one irresistible conclusion-that there was no wrongdoing on the part of MCB or its officers,” the company said.
“MCB categorically denies all allegations of any wrongdoing, and will vigorously pursue all legal remedies available, in order to defend itself and Mr. Marshall given the apparent lack of regard to overwhelming contradictory evidence, and the commencement of prosecution before the investigations are complete. MCB will also be seeking international investment treaty protections,” it said.
“MCB has received legal advice, including from eminent jurists of India that the coercion allegations are untenable in law and MCB firmly believes that it will be vindicated,” the company added.
You must be logged in to post a comment.