Recently the BJP president Nitin Gadkari has been in the news for all the wrong reasons. Though the BJP President has been silent for quite sometime about the investments in his conglomerate the Purti Group, the wast web of investments has raised significant questions on his party the BJP. Has BJP gone a bit too far in the favor of their President Nitin Gadkari?
[box_dark]A few facts about the Gadkari case:[/box_dark][box_light]
- The Registrar of Companies records have revealed some startling facts. As per records, over 100 companies have invested in the ‘Purti Power and Sugars Limited’. However, the origin of these funds is not traceable at all.
- Another company by the name ‘Update Merchantile’ held around 29 lakh Purti shares. These shares were being controlled by 39 shareholders including Gadkari’s driver and accountant Manohar Panse.
- Panse apart from being an investor also happens to be a director in one of the companies that has invested in the Purti Group.
- One company by the name Ashwami Sales and marketing which has been listed as an investor in the group is non-existent.
- The investor company ‘Update Merchantile’ also is a shareholder in an infrastructure company. The company has investors based in Kolkata and Delhi which are further bifurcated into other towns of India.
[box_dark]BJP’s take on the Issue[/box_dark]
The party has been constantly coming out in the support of its president. However, this unbending support of the party has raised many uncomfortable questions for BJP. A conglomerate that has been built over a complex web of investments with untraceable sources of funds may be damaging for the party that has made claims of corruption and nepotism on the ruling party. However Gadkari and party stalwart L.K.Adwani have tried to make an image by demanding an inquiry into the matter. Mr.Adwani said, “allegations against Gadkari are that of standards of business and not misuse of poower or corruption”.
The recent developments have however made one thing very clear. Irrespective of Gadkari claiming to be a ‘Social Entrepreneur’ he cannot escape behind what may be common but an illegal business practice in Indian business. Most corporate houses and public listed companies rely on a complex investment pattern through trusts and small subsidiaries so that they retain their control over the company. However, in this case the question is that why a company that claims to be working for the welfare of the farmers needed such a complex investment pattern.