feeds from sacw.net
print version[The Judgement relies in toto on the 13.6.2014 Affidavit of the IO and completely ignores the over 1500 pages of documentary evidence filed by the Applicants/Petitioners. He has only quoted their affidavit, completely ignored Applicants’ arguments in writing, with documentary evidence and any points made by the Petitioners.]
Notes on the Gujarat HC ABA Order dtd 12.2.2015
Page 13
The Judgement quotes from the IO KN Patel’s affidavit that apart from making the point about not filing audit reports for six years, copies of the few aaudited accounts received from the Charity Commissioner “shockinhlyreveal huge discrepancies and omissions to the extent of over and above, donations received, even amounts received from the Government of India as grants are nowhere reflected in ‘Income and Expenditure accounts’ of the Trust. Sufficeth it to say that resistance of the petitioners to any kind of scrutiny by the Gujarat police being resisted under the guise of the accounts being audited is also falsified.â€
Response: In the affidavit dated June 18, 2015, the petitioners had explained in great detail how the IO KN Patel either has no understanding of accounts or was deliberately trying to mislead the Court. The fact of the matter (as explained in the voluminous affidavit [close to 100 pages) is as follows: A statement of audited accounts of any organisation/entity comprises of 1) Income and Expenditure statement; 2) Balance Sheets and 3) Schedules. It is a reading of these documents together that give a complete financial picture of the organisation. As a reading of the June 18, 2014 affidavit would clearly show, for example, a Earmarked Grant received by an Organisation for a specific purpose is reflected on the Liabilities side of the Balance Sheet and not in the ‘Incomee and Expenditure Statement.’ Thus the grant received from the Government of India (as also earmarked grants) are reflected in the Balance Sheet and not the ‘Income and Expenditure Statement.’ Not only had we stated this on affidavit but we had annexed the Statements of Accounts that is (1) Income and Expenditure statement; 2) Balance Sheets and 3) Schedules) for a number of years to the affidavit to June 18, 2014. Not only has the Prosecution deliberately ignored these detailed explanations with documentary evidence but extremely unfortunately just bought into the one sided and malafide case of the Prosecution completely ignoring detailed written averments and the Oral argument ts made by the applicants for over 5 hours in court.
Page 23 of the Judgement
The IO had alleged that ‘NIL’ amount was deposited in the Bank Accounts of the two Applicants for all of 2001 and all of 2002.
Response: That this is a complete falsehood was established by us filing the Actual Bank Statements attached to the Affidavit dated 18.6.2014. These Bank Statements were also handed over to the IO by the Applicants. And yet the Judgement shockingly buys into this deliberate attempt to mislead the Court and shockingly completely ignores the rebuttals with substantive documentary evidence put forward by the Applicants.
Page 33 of the Judgement
No auditing of accounts: Sweeping and erroneous remarks in the Judgement about “thus from the above it is evident that the accounts were also not audited for a long period of time and it is only when the FIR was registered wherein serious allegations of mis-appropriation of lakhs of rupees have been alleged that all of a sudden accts from April 2003-March 2008 were got audited in the year 2014.â€
Response: This is a gross misrepresentation of facts. (During appearances before the police as ordered by the Gujarat HC on 5.12.2014, both applicants had provided scanned copies of Income Tax Returns of both Sabrang Trust and Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) submitted to the IT department year after year the acknowledgement stamp of the department clearly shows.
Besides it is shocking that despite the fact that the Applicants has in their affidavit filed on January 23, 2015 before the Hon Gujarat HC ppointed this out, this has been completely ignored by the Judge. Reproduced below are relevant paras from the Affidavit of the Applicants filed before the High Court:
“ Par 27:- In this connection, I further say and submit that the Prosecution in its written queries to Applicants No 1 and 2 had asked for “Copies of IT Returns filed by Sabrang Trust and CJP during the period 2003-2004 to 2013-2014. (Running Pages 940 of the CRMA 4677/2014). I further say and submit that we had fully co-operated with this request and had submitted the IT Returns for the relevant periods for both the Trusts as can be seen from Running Pages 950 and annexed at Running Pages 1027-1049. Despite this full and ready cooperation, it was shocking and distressing for the Applicants to learn that the Prosecution has persisted with misinforming this Hon’ble Court.
From these documents available at the pages mentioned above it is clear that for the Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) Trust) (Running Pages 1027-1037 of CRMA 4677/2014):-
Assessment Year Submission Acknowledegment
2004-2005 15.12.2004
2005-2006 31.10.2005
2006-2007 31.10.2006
2007-2008 31.10.2007
2008-2009 08.12.2008
2009-2010 5.10.2009
2010-2011 11.10.2010
2011-2012 30.09.2011
2012-2013 28.09.2012
2013-2014 30.09.2013
2014-2015 29.09.2014
From these documents available at the pages mentioned above it is clear that for the Sabrang Trust (Running Pages 1038-1049of CRMA 4677/2014):-
Assessment Year Submission Acknowledegment
2004-2005 28.10.2004
2005-2006 31.08.200577
2006-2007 (31.10.2006)
2007-2008 16.10.2007
2008-2009 29.09.2008
2009-2010 29.09.2009
2010-2011 01.10.2010
2011-2012 29.09.2011
2012-2013 20.09.2012
2013-2014 23.09.2013
2014-2015 23.09.2014
(Next Para)I further say and submit that to end this unseemly and malicious lies once and for all, the Applicants are annexing hereto as Annexure GCollythe FCRA Account of the Citizens for Justice and Peace (CJP) submitted tothe Ministry of Home Affairs. From this it is clear that:0
2013-2014 submitted on 24.12.2014
§ 2012-2013 submitted on 1.10.2013
§ 2011-2012 submitted on 18.10.2012
§ 2010-2011 submitted on 22.12.2011
§ 2009-2010 submitted on 13.12.2010
§ 2008-2009 submitted on 26.3.2010 (I say and submit that we had submitted only hard copies, sent by registered post on time. This year’s Accounts for the FCRA were signed by the Chief executive and auditor (in these years online submission facility was not available) on 30.09.2009
§ 2007-2008 submitted on 17.2.2009(I say and submit that we had submitted only hard copies, sent by registered post on time. This year’s Accounts for the FCRA were signed by the Chief executive and auditor (in these years online submission facility was not available) on30.12.2008.
(Next Para) I further say and submit that to end this unseemly and malicious lies once and for all, the Applicants are annexing hereto as Annexure H Collythe FCRA Account of the SabrangTrust submitted tothe Ministry of Home Affairs .
· 2013-2014 submitted on 13.12.2014
· 2012-2013 submitted on 1.10.2013
· 2011-2012 submitted on 18.10.2012
· 2010-2011 submitetd on 21.12.2011
· 2009-2010 submitted on 13.12.2010
· 2008-2009 submitted on 25.3.2010 ((I say and submit that we had submitted only hard copies, sent by registered post on time. This year’s Accounts for FCRA were signed by Chief executive and auditor (in these years online submission facility was not available) on 30.09.2009
· 2007-2008 submitted on 19.2.2009(I say and submit that we had submitted only hard copies, sent by registered post on time. This year’s Accounts for the FCRA were signed by the Chief executive and auditor (in these years online submission facility was not available) on 23.12.2008)
=======
SEE:
- ADDITIONAL AFFIDAVIT IN REJOINDER OF THE APPLICANTS (8 Jan 2015)
- Teesta Atul Setalvad & Anr.
V/s
State of Gujarat
MISCELLANEOUS CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4677 OF 2014
- Documents Submitted to the Court Running Pages References in CRMA 4677/2014
o o o
India - Gujarat: Intimidation by foisting false cases against Teesta Setalvad and Javed Anand | statements by Sabrang and CJP
http://www.sacw.net/article7161.html
