FAQ: When Will We Get Back Our Hard-Earned Money?

FAQ: When Will We Get Back Our Hard-Earned Money?

Posted on 19th September, 2024 (GMT 11:52 hrs)

Updated on 19th September, 2024 (GMT 14:58 hrs)

ABSTRACT

The article addresses the DHFL scam victims’ frustration, urging them to take proactive measures instead of repeatedly asking when they’ll recover their funds. It highlights systemic issues, such as the influence of the ruling party, judicial delays, and the questionable role of key figures like Ajay Piramal. Victims are encouraged to pursue civil disobedience and legal action, emphasizing that pressure from organized activism could hasten justice. The court and executive failures are criticized, suggesting activism as a means to reclaim their rights.

We, the OBMA activists, share the frustration cum irritation of continuously facing the same question from certain persons over and over again, who have been genuinely afflicted by the Dewan Housing Finance Corporation Limited (DHFL) Scam: “When will we get our hard-earned life savings back?” While we fully understand their anxiety and empathize with their undeserving plight, repeatedly asking this question on various platforms without taking meaningful action will not bring about the desired result.

It disheartens us to see many victims, who, out of fear, apathy, or indifference, are quick to ask these questions but reluctant to participate in the web-based non-violent civil disobedience movement—an effort that could actually accelerate the process of recovery. Simply asking whilst sitting passive is futile in the long run.

If you patiently analyze the situation now, after 2024 Lok Sabha Election, you can easily understand the states of affairs or “what’s going on”.

In light of this, and in an effort to provide a clear and final response, we present a few key points that could help alleviate the suffering of DHFL victims through organized resistance— a stance we have been encouraging since as early as 2021.

The return of your money depends on several key factors:

1. The Ruling Party’s Will and Whimdom

• Blurring of Boundaries: The demarcating line between the executive and judiciary has become blurred, leading to potential manipulation of justice. In other words, the watertight compartmentalization of the executive and judiciary is in the process of withering away.
• Direct Involvement in Financial Malpractices: The ruling party is allegedly linked to terror funding through figures like Dawood, Mirchi, Dheeraj Realty, and DHFL.
• Electoral Bonds and Contributions: Notably, Mr. Piramal donated ₹85 crore to the ruling party through electoral bonds, while the Wadhawan brothers’ “lesser” contribution of ₹27.5 crore was tied to terror funding.

2. Strength of the Pressure Group

• Online and On-Ground Activism: The more pressure you apply—both online and in the streets—the stronger your chances. Two recent movements highlight this very phenomenon:
  • Farmers’ Movement: Over 750 farmers sacrificed their lives, pushing the government to act in repealing the draconian farmers’ laws. They did not take their struggle to the courts, but emphasized the fight for justice on the public spaces, implying how one has to frequently exploit the space(s) outside the restricted-expensive domains of the judiciary. Online toolkits further helped the farmers with their agenda.
  • R.G. Kar Movement in Kolkata: This movement led to the Supreme Court taking suo moto cognizance of the issue. However, it must also be noted that due to the potential Saffronization of the SCI, it failed to take similar Suo Moto measures in the rape cases where BJP members and leaders were/are involved, e.g., Asifa, Bilkis Bano, Manipur Gender Violence, Ram Mandir Gangrape, Snoopgate scandal, as well as with regard to the allegations made against Prajwal Revanna and Brij Bhushan Singh and so on. The SCI has also failed to pay heed to the DHFL victims’ call for taking suo moto cognizance through an online mass petition in the case of financial abuse by the RBI-appointed CoC and Mr. Ajay Piramal.

3. Merits of the Case In Favour of the Victims

• Exposing the Role of RBI-Appointed CoC: The committee overseeing DHFL has been exposed for its questionable actions. The initial NCLT verdict on 19/05/2021 went against the CoC’s Resolution Plan, but the second NCLT order on 07/06/2021 favored Mr. Piramal (who is “more equal than others”). The NCLAT second verdict on 27/01/2022 highlighted that the resolution plan is full of material irregularities, illegalities and that the resolution process is void. Credit is due to 63 Moons Technologies for their sinceremost legal efforts, which exposed the CoC’s misconduct.
• Piramal’s Takeover: Mr. Piramal, as an adverse possessor, benefiting from the lowest quasi-judicial body’s second verdict and a blanket stay order from the Supreme Court on 11/04/2022, now claims “ownership” of the DHFL even when the case is still sub judice.

Additional Points:

• Court Delays: The Supreme Court continues to delay its final verdict by giving out “taarikh pe taarikh”, seemingly to protect the crony interests of Mr. Piramal, the CoC, and the ruling party’s close connections with Mukesh Ambani, who is again the secondary kin of Mr. Piramal.
• Setting a Precedent: One must not forget the RBI-appointed CoC for DHFL’s reaction to the first NCLT ruling on 19th May, 2021—“The verdict will set a bad precedent”—reflecting their attempt to shield the RP despite the adverse judgment to reconsider the erstwhile promoters’ full repayment settlement proposal. In fact, as per the RBI’s intent, the DHFL case was put under the ill-conceived Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) as a “test case,” with over 35 amendments to the code, treating FD and NCD holders as experimental subjects or mere guinea pigs in the lab-state of the RBI.