Venky’s v Indian Government (a) - 5/8/2025 - Post-Season Friendly (s/t late postponements)

[lraC]

On 30/05/2025 at 18:43, RevidgeBlue said:

Yep. 

(Speculating here)......maybe it's like Exiled said and they know there are further matters yet to be uncovered therefore they know they'd be likely to lose any monies put up as guarantee.

But.....(Thinking aloud) If all other dealings related to Rovers are above board then even with a politically motivated Government gunning for you, surely any guarantees given in that respect should be safe and there shouldn't be any worries in that respect about sending money over.

It's a weird one.

With the bits most posters on here know, I would be very surprised if everything has been totally above board for the last 15 years.

My opinion is they are less than 50% sure that any bond posted, will be returned. 

Edited June 2 by lraC
Typo

[Browjd]

Just a reminder - what are the Venkys getting out of owning Blackburn Rovers?!

[Upside Down]

7 hours ago, 1864roverite said:

A few pointers - rovers had 2 sets of accountant doing a sweep and review of the accounts 2 years ago and no evidence of impropriety was found then!

Indian government and their financial departments have absolutely no jurisdiction over Rovers or the venkys companies based in the UK.

As far as anyone is aware HMRC have not got Rovers in their sights - we just are a club with huge financial outlays/contracts and image rights! That’s where their investigations lie at the moment !

Quick question, just the same one you've been dodging for a few years now.

Now that Swag has left the building, can you please tell us what it was that he promised you would happen? You know, the 'big changes' that you shat on about repeatedly. 

Surely you can just tell us. What have you got to lose?

[lraC]

10 hours ago, Browjd said:

Just a reminder - what are the Venkys getting out of owning Blackburn Rovers?!

Lots of hassle and negative publicity. 

[lraC]

6 hours ago, Upside Down said:

Quick question, just the same one you've been dodging for a few years now.

Now that Swag has left the building, can you please tell us what it was that he promised you would happen? You know, the 'big changes' that you shat on about repeatedly. 

Surely you can just tell us. What have you got to lose?

Good luck with getting an answer on that one, straight or otherwise. Even one to keep a bit of credibility, would be a start, such as, I think I was fobbed off, as it’s clear to see, things did not materialise, in the way he promised. 

[47er]

1 hour ago, lraC said:

Lots of hassle and negative publicity. 

but not enough...

[Mattyblue]

8 hours ago, Upside Down said:

 

Now that Swag has left the building, can you please tell us what it was that he promised you would happen? You know, the 'big changes' that you shat on about repeatedly. 

 

New line of biscuits were due to come in to the offices.

[wilsdenrover]

The below formed part of the last court order:

 

At the time I didn’t think much of this, but I’ve since discovered the Adjudicating Authority are who the Directorate of Enforcement (respondent no.2) refer a case to once they’ve gathered their evidence of a violation.

That authority then hears the case and decides if and what penalty to impose.

Maybe things are about to move forward… 

Edited to add:

I’ve also just discovered the maximum penalty that can be imposed is three times the sum involved in the breach.

(Unfortunately I don’t think the provision in the law imposing a jail sentence of up to five years will be applicable).

 

 

Edited 4 hours ago by wilsdenrover

[lraC]

1 hour ago, wilsdenrover said:

The below formed part of the last court order:

 

At the time I didn’t think much of this, but I’ve since discovered the Adjudicating Authority are who the Directorate of Enforcement (respondent no.2) refer a case to once they’ve gathered their evidence of a violation.

That authority then hears the case and decides if and what penalty to impose.

Maybe things are about to move forward… 

Edited to add:

I’ve also just discovered the maximum penalty that can be imposed is three times the sum involved in the breach.

(Unfortunately I don’t think the provision in the law imposing a jail sentence of up to five years will be applicable).

 

 

Any idea when a decision will be made?

[wilsdenrover]

10 minutes ago, lraC said:

Any idea when a decision will be made?

No idea sorry.

I’ve read the relevant law and it says the convening of the Adjudicating Authority will be announced in the Official Gazette.

I’ve found the website for this but it doesn’t seem possible to search by ‘the accused’.

I was prepared to read through the last few weeks to see if I could find Venkys but when I click on a file nothing happens.

Edited 3 hours ago by wilsdenrover

[lraC]

3 minutes ago, wilsdenrover said:

No idea sorry.

I’ve read the relevant law and it says the convening of the Adjudicating Authority will be announced in the Official Gazette.

Ive found the website for this but it doesn’t seem possible to search by ‘the accused’.

I was prepared to read through the last few weeks to see if I could find Venkys but when I click on a file nothing happens.

No worries.

I just checked on Twitter and Rory mentions Alexander house going on the market in April 2024. Not sure if it’s sold though.

[wilsdenrover]

Further little update…

On top of the up to 3 x financial penalty:

The Adjudicating Authority can also impose that any property related to the contravention be confiscated to the Indian Government.

So if they’ve still got Alexander House this could be seized, and if they’ve sold it the proceeds of the sale could be seized.

This would obviously require an English Court to issue an order to this effect.

Personally I hope the Authority squeeze until the pips squeak. 

[wilsdenrover]

Just now, lraC said:

No worries.

I just checked on Twitter and Rory mentions Alexander house going on the market in April 2024. Not sure if it’s sold though.

Thanks, my most recent post reveals why whether it’s sold or not doesn’t matter (I should have read the law more carefully before asking the question!!)

[davulsukur]

3 minutes ago, wilsdenrover said:

Further little update…

On top of the up to 3 x financial penalty:

The Adjudicating Authority can also impose that any property related to the contravention be confiscated to the Indian Government.

So if they’ve still got Alexander House this could be seized, and if they’ve sold it the proceeds of the sale could be seized.

This would obviously require an English Court to issue an order to this effect.

Personally I hope the Authority squeeze until the pips squeak. 

Assuming they give them, say x3 financial penalty (or any other punishment), is that the end of the court case completely?

[wilsdenrover]

5 minutes ago, davulsukur said:

Assuming they give them, say x3 financial penalty (or any other punishment), is that the end of the court case completely?

There’s an appeals process (either party can instigate).

The appeal can also be appealed (again by either party)

I think (and hope!!) that’s as far as things can go.

 

Edited 3 hours ago by wilsdenrover

[lraC]

9 minutes ago, wilsdenrover said:

Further little update…

On top of the up to 3 x financial penalty:

The Adjudicating Authority can also impose that any property related to the contravention be confiscated to the Indian Government.

So if they’ve still got Alexander House this could be seized, and if they’ve sold it the proceeds of the sale could be seized.

This would obviously require an English Court to issue an order to this effect.

Personally I hope the Authority squeeze until the pips squeak. 

That blows a hole in some interpretations, as some have said, with it being a transaction in the UK the Indian government can’t get involved.

[lraC]

16 minutes ago, wilsdenrover said:

Further little update…

On top of the up to 3 x financial penalty:

The Adjudicating Authority can also impose that any property related to the contravention be confiscated to the Indian Government.

So if they’ve still got Alexander House this could be seized, and if they’ve sold it the proceeds of the sale could be seized.

This would obviously require an English Court to issue an order to this effect.

Personally I hope the Authority squeeze until the pips squeak. 

Just to clarify on this. Does the 3x penalty means the amount they transferred, plus the value of the property? 
That would equate to £28m which despite their wealth, is surely a kick in the teeth. 

[Rogerb]

The original purchase of the house was around £7 million from memory.

[wilsdenrover]

19 minutes ago, lraC said:

Just to clarify on this. Does the 3x penalty means the amount they transferred, plus the value of the property? 
That would equate to £28m which despite their wealth, is surely a kick in the teeth. 

Up to 3x just relates to the funds transferred.

Seizing the property (or sale proceeds) is on top of this.

I assume the judge would have to justify adding the latter for there to be any chance of the court in England issuing the necessary order. 

[wilsdenrover]

36 minutes ago, lraC said:

That blows a hole in some interpretations, as some have said, with it being a transaction in the UK the Indian government can’t get involved.

There’s a treaty between the UK and India which covers this. 

Still needs a UK court order but the UK judge would consider the said treaty in coming to their decision. 

[lraC]

Just now, wilsdenrover said:

Up to 3x just relates to the funds transferred.

Seizing the property (or sale proceeds) is on top of this.

I assume the judge would have to justify adding the latter for there to be any chance of the court in England issuing the necessary order. 

Funds transferred to buy the property are around £7m but what if it’s all funds transferred since 2011. Now that would be fun.

[davulsukur]

1 hour ago, wilsdenrover said:

There’s an appeals process (either party can instigate).

The appeal can also be appealed (again by either party)

I think (and hope!!) that’s as far as things can go.

 

Cheers.

I assume an appeal process would be at absolute piss taking levels of time, so this would likely drag on for years?

If they appeal it, would that still keep the blocker in place for funding the club? Or would that be removed regardless?

[wilsdenrover]

28 minutes ago, lraC said:

Funds transferred to buy the property are around £7m but what if it’s all funds transferred since 2011. Now that would be fun.

It would but I think it would only cover ‘dodgy’ funds.

Lets hope they’ve found plenty.

[wilsdenrover]

8 minutes ago, davulsukur said:

Cheers.

I assume an appeal process would be at absolute piss taking levels of time, so this would likely drag on for years?

If they appeal it, would that still keep the blocker in place for funding the club? Or would that be removed regardless?

Probably! There’s a limit for how long you have to lodge an appeal but I don’t think there was one for it being heard (I’ve opened a bottle of wine since reading it 😁😁).

I don’t know the answer re the blocker,  sorry. 

[lraC]

Just now, wilsdenrover said:

It would but I think it would only cover ‘dodgy’ funds.

Lets hope they’ve found plenty.

I have attached part of an article from an Indian publication, as that indicates, that they did not declare the real reason for the equity infusion into Venkys of London.

If it’s 3 x the total amount, it’s game over, surely.