Black money in India: HSBC list has 628 names, top amount $18 mnAppu Esthose Suresh | New Delhi | Updated: Oct 26 2014, 13:47 ISTOnly about a fifth of the individuals or entities named in the so-called HSBC black money list on India of alleged foreign account holders have acknowledged their ownership of the accounts. These individuals or entities — 136 in number — have either paid, or are in the process of paying, penalties for concealing incomes.The HSBC black money list contains names and holdings of individuals or entities with accounts in the Geneva branch of HSBC's Swiss subsidiary HSBC Private Bank. The information was stolen from the bank by a former employee on a particular day in 2006. The list was given to India by France in June 2011.According to documents accessed by The Indian Express, the HSBC list contains names of 628 Indian individuals or entities. The Income Tax Department has so far found matches between names and addresses in 418 cases. In 282 of these cases, however, either the account number or the balance in the account is not available.In general, the list contains four sets of information: name, address, account number and balance.Of the 136 individuals or entities who have acknowledged the accounts, many have pleaded that they were not aware of their existence, but would pay the tax and penalty due, senior I-T officers involved in the investigation said. Many of these 136 accounts show zero balance.The addresses against 12 of the 418 names in the list belong to Kolkata. However, only six have confirmed that the account belongs to them.The highest amount in the list is $ 18 million, allegedly belonging to two top industrialists.The most common surnames on the list are Mehta and Patel.French authorities had secured the list from software technologist Hervé Falciani, who has been collaborating with several European countries tracking suspected tax evaders with accounts in Swiss banks. The list contains alleged account data on the date Falciani procured them.The Indian Express was the first to report in August 2011 that the French had handed over to India the list of HSBC account holders of Indian origin. The government is in the process of sending a list of 50 names from the 136 to Swiss authorities to confirm the authenticity of the information.

http://www.financialexpress.com/news/black-money-in-india-hsbc-list-has-628-names-top-amount-18-mn/1301633

Sivasankaran...Astute deal maker, now a bankrupt entrepreneur...!!!!

C Sivasankaran: Once the country's most astute deal maker, now a bankrupt entrepreneur
Business Standard traces the life and times of the maverick businessmanSurajeet Das Gupta, Bhupesh Bhandari, TE Narasimhan & Gireesh Babu  |  New Delhi/ Chennai  

September 6, 2014 Last Updated at 00:20 IST

On August 26, the Supreme Court of Seychelles declared Chinnakannan Sivasankaran, better known as Siva, bankrupt. An official receiver for Siva's global estate was appointed. It will be this person's job to compile a list of Siva's assets - homes, aircraft, yachts and other baubles - and sell them to pay back his creditors. Amongst Siva's creditors, the largest is BMIC, a Bahrain Telecom, or Batelco, company. In a statement issued from Manama in Bahrain, Batelco CEO Alan Whelan said that the bankruptcy will not "thwart our determination to recover the substantial monies that he owes us". Siva is learnt to have sounded out some Chennai lawyers to find out the implications for his assets in India.

For Siva, the India-born 58-year-old citizen of Seychelles, this was actually his second brush with bankruptcy in less than a year. In October 2013, WinWinD, his Finland-headquartered wind turbine venture, submitted a voluntary bankruptcy petition because it had "been incurring heavy losses for the past several years" and its debts had ballooned to around ^300 million. "The efforts of WinWinD in trying to arrange for necessary funding and approval for restructuring process has not been successful and hence this decision," the company said at that time.

Disbelief about the news of the bankruptcy looms large in Siva's native Chennai. One industry representative insists that when he spoke to Siva last week, he was "cool and calm, and showed no sign of agitation". Siva could not be reached for this report. His senior executives in India too were not available for comment. The Siva group's website still claims that it is a $3-billion conglomerate with interests in "oil palm, commodities trading [minerals], agro exports, shipping and logistics, wind energy, realty & hospitality and education/e-learning", but it is clear that it will take Siva some effort from here to restore his glory.

Not so long ago, Siva was known as the country's most astute deal-maker (to close a deal, he could leave India for the United States in an hour's time), the serial entrepreneur with the Midas touch, who made obscene sums of money in all deals, except one (much of it later). Born on July 29, 1956, Siva started his innings in business in 1985 after he purchased Sterling Computers from Robert Amritraj, father of former tennis star Vijay Amritraj, and launched personal computers for as little as Rs 33,000 - rival machines cost as much as Rs 80,000 at that time. Success was instant. Sterling was catapulted to the top three computer companies of India. Siva would now operate out of the presidential suites of the Ritz-Carlton and Pan Pacific hotels in Singapore and developed a fondness for Rolex gold watches, Montblanc pens and fine food. But it was telecom that would give Siva's business - and reputation - a big boost and ultimately cause him a great deal of heartburn.

In 1992, Siva won a five-year contract from state-owned MTNL, which ran telecom services in Delhi and Mumbai, to print Yellow Pages in its directory for a period of five years. (Allegations of favouritism were made at MTNL at that time for awarding the contract to Siva, but nothing came out of them.) It took Siva little time to sense that the telecom sector would soon be thrown open to the private sector. The possibilities thrilled him. Siva shifted base from Chennai to New Delhi, operating out of a five-star hotel. In 2004, Siva managed to get cellular telephony licences for Delhi and three other telecom circles: Uttar Pradesh (east), Haryana and Rajasthan. Within no time, he sold these licences to his old acquaintance from Chennai, Shashi Ruia of Essar, for $105 million. "He was sharp, well-informed on telecom, a keen negotiator and a man of honour when the deal was done," Ruia had told Business Standard in mid-2004.

MC Hammer

All of a sudden, Siva was loaded. In 1996, he purchased rapper MC Hammer's house in Fremont, California, to set up his base in the United States. The same year, he started to acquire shares in Sunil Mittal's Bharti Telecom. By early 1997, he was sitting on around 10 per cent in the company and demanded a slot on its board of directors. Mittal, no less a negotiator, refused. Eventually, Siva sold the shares to Mittal at Rs 90 apiece; his acquisition cost had been Rs 100. This was the only instance when Siva lost money. But he was still rich. Siva in 1997 bailed out an Indian-owned bank in Thailand along with Hong Kong-based tycoon Hari Harilela. Meanwhile, the Ruias offered him shares in Tamilnad Mercantile Bank. But the Nadar community, which owned the bank, opposed the deal. Two years later, in mid-1999, it bought out Siva's stake. His net gain in the transaction was substantial. Siva next sold Dishnet DSL, the country's first internet DSL provider he had launched in 1998, toVSNL for Rs 270 crore. He even wrote to Rebecca Mark, the CEO of Enron India, to buy the troubled energy company's India business for Rs 1!

Siva found it hard to stay away from telecom. He bought the licence for Tamil Nadu and then acquired the one for Chennai from RPG Cellular. From here, he decided to expand his footprint. In March 2004, Siva applied for the licence in the eight circles of Madhya Pradesh, Assam, North East, West Bengal, Bihar, Orissa, Himachal Pradesh and Jammu & Kashmir. Letters of intent were issued on April 6. The company submitted compliance to the letters of intent on April 20 for seven circles, and sought additional time for Madhya Pradesh. The next day, the company applied for licences for Uttar Pradesh (east) and Uttar Pradesh (west) as well. On May 7, licences were issued for all the circles, except Madhya Pradesh. Then, on May 26, Dayanidhi Maran took over as the Union telecom minister. Siva was now bombarded with queries from the department of telecommunications. His expansion plans got badly stuck at Sanchar Bhawan, the DoT headquarters. "The clarifications sought, besides being vague, were also irrelevant for consideration of application for grant of the universal licence," the Shivraj Patil Committee appointed to report "on the examination of appropriateness of procedures followed by department of telecommunications in issuance of licences and allocation of spectrum during the period 2001-2009" said in January 2011.

More was in store for Siva. In June 2004, one month after Maran had become the telecom minister, Siva had entered into an agreement with Hutchison to sell his Tamil Nadu operations for Rs 1,200 crore - this would have given him the funds to roll out in the rest of the country. The rule book said that any transfer of equity would require the assent of DoT. Thus, on June 28, Siva sought DoT's approval for the stake sale, and provided all relevant documents by August 14. But DoT did not give its nod, nor did it provide any reason for the inactivity. On March 3, 2005, Dayanidhi Maran sent the file back on the pretext that a report on mergers and acquisitions was awaited. The same month, Siva cancelled the deal.

It later also came to light that state-owned BSNL, during those days, did not provide interconnectivity to Siva's Aircel. In 2005, BSNL was the dominant provider of fixed-line services with 40 per cent of the 40 million subscribers, and was a sizeable player in mobile services too with 23 per cent of the 48 million connections. If BSNL did not provide connectivity to any operator, it was doomed. Finally, in August 2005, BSNL did relent and agreed to give Aircel access to points of interconnection, but only in 76 of the 461 points. In December 2005, Siva announced that he would sell Aircel to Maxis of Malaysia, promoted by Tatparanandam Ananda Krishna, a Malaysian of Sri Lankan origin. In March 2006, Maxis informed its shareholders that the Aircel deal had been completed. Things now began to move fast at the DoT headquarters at Sanchar Bhawan. All the clearances came quickly.

Siva was known to be close to the leadership of the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam, Maran's party, as well as Murasoli Maran, the minister's father. Legend has it that at an industry interaction in 1989, where other businessmen were paying inane homilies, Siva's plain-speak made quite an impact on the chief minister and DMK chief, M Karunanidhi. Then why did Maran turn against Siva? Unconfirmed reports suggest that Maran did not like Siva's closeness to Ratan Tata, then Tata Sons chairman. Siva had helped Tata Teleservices source cheap equipment for its rollout by playing off a US multinational against a European giant. He subsequently bought 10 per cent in Tata Teleservices. On the other hand, there was a "chemistry problem" between Tata and Maran. It reportedly arose when Tata decided to get into DTH. The Sun TV network also had an eye on the space and was keen to tie up with Tata. But Tata had decided to go ahead with The British Sky Broadcasting Group.

On Monday, June 6, 2011, Siva dropped a bombshell when he came to the Central Bureau of Investigation headquarters in New Delhi and claimed that he was forced by the Maran brothers, Dayanidhi and Kalanithi, to sell Aircel to Maxis. He provided CBI with a list of 10 witnesses, most of them based abroad, to support his charge: bankers, venture capitalists and lawyers. Maran refuted the allegation and said newspaper reports "clearly prove that this particular company was parading itself even before I became the telecom minister". But that didn't cut much ice. Last week, CBI filed a charge sheet saying that the Marans received Rs 742 crore for coercing Siva to sell Aircel to Maxis in the garb of investments in Sun Direct (the DTH operator) and South Asia FM.

Even after he had sold Aircel, Siva continued to nurture telecom dreams. The telecom ministry, now under Andimuthu Raja, had declared its intent to hand out more licences on first-come, first-served basis. The price for a pan-India licence (22 telecom circles) was Rs 1,658 crore. One of the companies to get those controversy-ridden licences was STel. (It had got six circles: Orissa, Bihar, Himachal Pradesh, Northeast, Assam and Jammu & Kashmir). Siva had acquired 51 per cent of it. While there were rumblings that licences had been handed out by Raja at throwaway prices, Siva, in November 2007 wrote to Mamohan Singh, then prime minister, that he would pay the government a revenue share of Rs 6,000 crore over 10 years for a pan-India licence. A month later, it raised the offer to Rs 13,752 crore. Using this as the benchmark, the Comptroller & Auditor General said in its damning report the loss to the government in the spectrum allocation came to Rs 67,364 crore. In September 2011, it transpired that there wasn't complete agreement in the CAG team over the calculation because the company had subsequently withdrawn the offer.

Batelco bought 49 per cent in STel in 2009 for Rs 1,000 crore. By then, opposition to the allotment of inexpensive spectrum had gathered momentum. The United Progressive Alliance government came under fire. Raja was removed. Several people, including Raja, were taken into custody. Finally, in February 2012, the Supreme Court cancelled all the 122 licences allotted by Raja. STel, which had about 3.6 million subscribers in five circles, had no option but to shut shop. That is when BMIC, which owned 42.7 per cent in the company, invoked the "put" option under which in an exigency like this Siva had to buy out its stake at the price at which it had been bought: $212 million. BMICsays Siva never paid up. According to one account, Siva wrote to Singh, then prime minister, within days of the Supreme Court verdict to demand Rs 1,700 crore for surrendering the licences. All his entreaties fell on deaf ears. Last month, BMIC got an order from an English high court to freeze Siva's assets worldwide. A few days later, Siva was declared bankrupt in Seychelles.

What went wrong? An answer possibly resides on the Siva group website. "Foresight is a gift," it says. "And when you combine it with skill and commercial acumen, the result is often breathtaking."

THE SERIAL ENTREPRENEUR No conversation with Siva can end without exchanging notes on food. Seafood is his all-time favourite. At meals, he would serve the finest of the world cuisine. Overindulgence would frequently lead to serious guilt pangs. That propelled Siva to foray into the health business. In the early 1990s, when he was operating out of a five-star hotel in New Delhi, Siva had two snazzy treadmills installed in his suite. Several unsuspecting visitors were made to use them. He then started a state-of-the-art gym in Chennai which was used by top cricketers. In the same vein, he set up a chain of health-food restaurants that were designed like a sushi bar. He chose to call them Aiwo. Two were opened in Singapore and one in Chennai. Though Siva wanted to take it global, Aiwo has morphed into a weight-loss clinic called Ken, with a branch each in Mumbai and Chennai. He even invested in the Chiva Som Resort in Thailand, Asia's first spa destination. In April 2004, Siva bought coffee chain Barista from Turner Morrison and Tata Sons for around Rs 65 crore. He was quite charged up with the acquisition. He told Business Standard that he would make Barista "the Starbucks of India" and would expand its network from 100 outlets to 3,000 in three years' time, including one in this newspaper's office. He also wanted to expand the menu to include falafel and sushi. Before three years passed, he had sold Barista to Lavazza of Italy for $100 million because he had decided to "focus and expand in the business of renewable energy". That quest made him acquire WinWinD in 2006. In 2007, he bought 49 per cent into Sahara group's Aamby Valleyproject, on the condition that Sahara would buy back his shares at a pre-determined price three years later. He got Rs 1,680 crore from the sale. In 2008, Siva bought a Norwegian shipping company called JB Ugland Shipping for around $300 million. An information memorandum for a private placement of debentures by Siva Ventures in June 2009 disclosed that Siva had taken the 931-hectare Coetivy Island in Seychelles, 290 km south of Mahe, on a 99-year lease to develop a mega township. That is what seems to have taken Siva to that country. For all his profitable deals, Siva left behind a trail of failed ventures. He had tied up with Subhash Chandraof Essel to get into DTH but the project never got off the ground. He had announced a $1-billion undersea cable line from Chennai to Guam but Sunil Mittal got a similar project up and running first, which ended the viability of Siva's plan. At various times, he is known to have dropped plans to buy VSNL from the government (the Tata group bagged it), set up a 2,500-apartment residential complex in Chennai, erect a chemicals plant at Cuddalore and acquire a factory to make tungsten for defence. Serial entrepreneur for sure, but the tag would often hurt Siva when he went out to recruit people. "He looks at each business for not more than five years," says a Chennai-based industry watcher. "That's why the best talent doesn't join him." http://www.business-standard.com/article/companies/c-sivasankaran-once-the-country-s-most-astute-deal-maker-now-a-bankrupt-entrepreneur-114090501264_1.html

Women rape cases in India

92 women raped in India every day, 4 cases in DelhiPTI | New Delhi | Published: Sep 04 2014, 17:55 IST92 women were raped on an average every day in India and Delhi with 1,636 cases recorded the highest number of such crimes among all cities last year.92 women were raped on an average every day in India and Delhi with 1,636 cases recorded the highest number of such crimes among all cities last year.According to figures released by the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), the total number of rape cases reported in India has gone up to 33,707 in 2013 from 24,923 in 2012.In 15,556 cases, the rape victims were aged between 18 and 30 years in 2013.The number of rape cases has doubled in Delhi in 2013 compared to the previous year. A total of 1,636 rape cases were reported in the city last year, while 706 such cases were reported in the year 2012. On an average, four rape cases were reported in Delhi everyday in 2013.The number of rape cases in Delhi was followed by 391 cases in Mumbai, 192 cases in Jaipur and 171 cases in Pune in 2013.As per the NCRB data, Madhya Pradesh at an average records 11 rapes every day, with a total of 4,335 such cases, which is the highest in 2013 among all other states.Madhya Pradesh is followed by Rajasthan with 3,285 cases, Maharashtra with 3,063 and Uttar Pradesh with 3,050 rape cases.The data showed that 13,304 cases were reported in 2013 where the victim was a minor, which was 9,082 in the previous year.The data also unveiled a disturbing fact that in the majority of the cases, the offenders were known to the victims. NCRB statistics shows that in 94 per cent of the cases the offenders were familiar to the accused.These offenders included parents in 539 cases, neighbours in 10,782 cases, relatives in 2,315 cases and other known persons in 18,171 such cases reported over the year.

http://www.financialexpress.com/news/92-women-raped-in-india-every-day-4-cases-in-delhi/1285640?rhheader

MY SUCCESS STORY..

I MISSED MY NIGHT SLEEP (IN 1991-95, I USED TO STUDY THE HARD COPIES OF CAPITAL MARKETS AND DALAL STREET…UPTO 3 AM,ONE DAY UPTO 5 AM…., NOW  SIMILAR SLEEPLESS STUDY…, I NEVER STUDIED MY CLASS BOOKS LIKE THIS…) DUE TO A SERIOUS SEACH FOR TINY STOCKS THAT CAN FETCH 500-1000% RISE IN FUTURE. THE SEARCH AND RESEARCH IS ON………… THE STORY OF MULTIBAGGERS IS A EVER RISING NOVEL STORY IN STOCK MARKETS…ONLY THING WE NEED TO DO IS JUST TRUST WHAT YOU THOUGHT IS RIGHT AND BELIEVE IN WHAT YOU IDENTIFIED/STUDIED……..…….

A SATISFACTION BUILT DISAPPOINTMENT OF MISSING INDOCOUNT INDUSTRIES WHICH I IDENTIFIED AT 7-9 NOW AT 144 A 18 MONTH HOLDING PERIOD, A 1500-2000% RETURN IS A PHENOMENAL CASE TO “BLOW ONE’S OWN TRUMPET”.

AT A SIMILAR TIME FRAME IDENTIFIED MORARJEE TEXTILE AT SAME 7-8 RUPEES NOW AT 44. I IDENTIFIED PHARMA AT 3 NOW AT 35 A 10 TIMES RISE..NOT ENJOYED…

SIMILARLY FINDING AND  I ENJOYED 700% RISE IN KM SUGAR BOUGHT AT 1 AND 1.35, NO OTHE SUGAR STOCK GAVE SUCH PHENOMENAL RETURN. I DOUBLED MONEY IN RANA SUGARS.

I BOUGHT BIRLA ERICSSON AT 10-12, NOW AT 65 LEVELS, SUGGESTED ALL TELECOM OPTIC FIBRE CABLE COMPANIES, WHICH GAVE 300 TO 500% RISE, WITH SOME CLOSE FRIENDS, I EVEN FOUGHT FOR THEIR INVESTMENTS IN THESE STOCKS.

AS A MATTER OF FACT, THIS RALLY HAVE GIVEN LIFE TO MANY TINY STOCKS, DORMANT FOR YEARS. AT THE SAME TIME THERE ARE MANY STOCKS THAT ARE AT THE SAME PRICE OR EVEN LOWER THAN TWO YEARS AGO.

SO, JUST TURN AROUND STORY, LIKE ARVIND AT 44 FOUR YEARS AGO NOW AT 240, PARTICIPATED BUT NO GREAT WAITING….

……….

THE LESSON IS SO SIMPLE THAT FIND OUT…KEEP ON INVESTING……SIT TIGHT WITH OUT DISTURBING THE HOLDING AT LEAST FOR 5-10 TIMES RISE.

………

FOR DAY TRADING..ALWAYS LIVE IN THE CURRENT TREND.... 

Reliance did not sideline me: Raghav Bahl, EMOTIONAL SHARING & BEARINGS...!!!

Reliance did not sideline me: Raghav Bahl

Raghav Bahl responds to various allegations made by critics ever since Reliance took over TV18 group,

BS Reporter  |  New Delhi  

July 25, 2014 Last Updated at 10:15 IST

On July 7, Reliance Industries announced a new board for the Rs 2692-crore Network18, a media conglomerate it took management control of in May this year following a financial bailout in early 2012. On July 8, Business Standard carried a piece titled 'What Legacy Does Raghav Bahl Leave Behind?' on the man who founded Network18 and ran it for over two decades. While Bahl had initially declined to speak, he has now responded to the many issues raised in the article. Here is an edited version of Raghav Bahl's take on many of those issues.

On Haresh Chawla quitting because of the Reliance deal

One of the most enduring myths perpetrated in media reports is that "Haresh left because he did not agree with the terms of the Reliance deal". The fact is that Haresh decided to leave in the first half of 2011; it was a "natural end" to a long innings. He felt the need to move on, I agreed, and that was that. It was early in 2011. The Reliance deal was nowhere in the line of sight, so he simply could not have objected to it (Haresh would happily confirm this. I also have a full mail trail which will bear this out). We agreed that he will take six months to close things out and groom Sai (Kumar, who became group CEO later) as his successor.

On Network18's complicated corporate structure and "accounting ethics"

This is one more myth that just keeps on getting repeated without evidence. Here are the facts. Our structure was complicated, and I am the first person to publicly acknowledge it. But the reason for that was the convergence of two outrageous government rules which trapped us in a pincer.

One, between 2004 and 2009, the government was unable to define "how to calculate indirect foreign equity." I must have made dozens of representations to get that clarification from the ministry of information & broadcasting but got no answer. In fact, ministry officials told me that "since there is no clarity on this matter, we will not be able to give a news broadcast licence to TV18. So if you want to launch new channels, you will have to do that in unrelated entities." And that's the only reason why we were forced to keep Awaaz and CNN-IBN in separate entities. As soon as the government clarified the definition of "indirect foreign equity" in 2009 (yes, it took nearly six years!), we reorganised the various companies into a single balance sheet.

The second government rule that trapped us was the requirement for a "single Indian shareholder to control 51 per cent of a news company." I had no option but to device structures that ensured that I had 51 per cent control. It was not out of some weird desire to control 51 per cent but because the law mandated it.

On questionable accounting ethics 

This one is another crazy myth that is propagated. One magazine wrote a whole article picking up disclosures from our own balance sheets but portrayed those as some kind of scoop that it had unearthed. Everything was fully disclosed in our own balance sheets. Nothing was ever hidden. All our auditors were globally acclaimed companies. And here's one more fact: not once over the last 21 years have we faced even a stricture (forget about a formal charge or first information report or investigation) from any regulatory authority anywhere in the world - be it the Securities & Exchange Board of India, Reserve Bank of India, the Enforcement Directorate, or under the Foreign Exchange Management Act or whatever - not even a stricture! There are very few companies in India of this size and age which can claim something like that.

On why Reliance "sidelined" Bahl

On what basis can this assertion be made? Have I said that it has sidelined me? No. Has it said that it has sidelined me? No. So why is it so difficult to believe that I have voluntarily chosen this option; that I have, consciously and with my wits about me, decided that this exit was the best decision to take in everybody's interest? Let me explain this a bit more. In January 2012, when we announced our transaction with Reliance, it was completely, fully and transparently disclosed (as opposed to certain other media groups which do not disclose similar transactions). It was clear why I had taken the advances, what we would do with them, how all the voting rights were vesting in me, and how, finally, Reliance had the option to take control "at a moment's notice." Because I was clear in my head about three things.

One, the transaction had to be fully and transparently revealed. Two, I would stay only as long as I had unmitigated and total control over the group, which meant that I exercised the voting rights on 73 per cent of promoters' equity, without any dilution of control in any manner. To be fair to Mr (Mukesh) Ambani, he fully honoured that commitment. Over the last two years, I had complete and unfettered control. No Reliance person was on our board or in our management or would even enter our offices. Three, it was always clear to Mr Ambani and to me that as soon as Reliance exercised its rights to take voting control away from me, which it had the right to do at a "moment's notice," I would walk away and become a friend, philosopher and guide. There was no way that I would stay back as a "professional executive" with Mr Ambani. And again to be fair to him, he fully understood, appreciated and endorsed the fact that "once an entrepreneur, always an entrepreneur."

This was known to both of us. Which is why there is no acrimony or bitterness at all.

On Reliance being angry about (KG) gas and Arvind Kejriwal coverage 

As for the coverage of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP), every newsroom in the country was passionately debating the pros and cons of this extraordinary phenomenon. Some of my own articles in FirstPost were fairly critical of several of the things AAP did during those six months - many others were vociferous supporters. I would often despair that the media, including ours, was transmitting AAP's allegations without putting them through a fact/truth check. This too would be contested by many of our editors, and I am sure the same thing was happening in every newsroom. Naturally, there were heated editorial debates, and we had our fair share of these - all very professional, normal and healthy. You only have to go through the archives of Network18 content, whether at FirstPost, CNN-IBN or IBN7, to see that every shade of opinion was carried and given a fair exposition. That should clearly establish our non-partisan credentials.

As for Reliance, it is a fact that it publicly denied AAP's charges via blogs and videos. It made its strong disagreement apparent to several media organisations, including Network18. That was all there was to this issue: nothing more, nothing less and nothing exceptional for Network18. Also, there have been some wild/unsubstantiated assertions about the use of abusive/intimidatory language by Mr Manoj Modi in a call to me. The person who makes this assertion does not wish to be identified, cannot produce a shred of written/oral/recorded/snooped evidence, yet the media plays this up as the gospel truth. So I hope you will allow me to say that all my conversations with Mr Modi have always been dignified and mature; as two adults, we may have disagreed on several issues, but the discourse was always civil, open and accommodating.

On how Reliance exercised "de facto" control over the last two years

This is another myth. Two "facts" are usually trotted out in support of this assertion. One, how some Forbes India editors were "sacked" at Reliance's instructions; but nothing could be farther from the truth here. And if you don't believe me, you simply have to ask senior editor R Jagannathan, who was in the thick of this fracas with the Forbes India editors. He will happily confirm that various decisions were taken by Sai, him and other senior people. Reliance was not even remotely in the picture. Two, 300 people were laid off at Reliance's insistence in 2013. Again, this is complete untruth. This restructuring, while unfortunate for those who were at the receiving end of it, was brilliantly conceived and executed by Sai/Ajay (Chacko, COO) along with (professional services firm) EY. It actually made the company truly healthy and fighting fit. Reliance was not even remotely in the picture. In fact, Reliance was justifiably unhappy with the fact that it had nothing to do with this stuff - it did not even have an inkling - but had to suffer the opprobrium and backlash in the media.

As for "editorial interference", I can truly say that we ran a fully empowered and independent ship. Ask somebody like Karan Thapar, who worked with me for over a decade - not once, not even once, did I ask him to change anything. Ask Rajdeep (Sardesai). Ask Senthil. Ask Sanjay Pugalia. Ask Ashutosh. Ask anybody!

http://www.business-standard.com/article/company/reliance-did-not-sideline-me-raghav-bahl-114072401670_1.html