SAHARA - SEBI: THE MURDEROUS POUND OF FLESH

As funny as it may appear but the Sahara Sebi issue strangely reminds me of

Shakespeare’s “Merchant of Venice”. For those who did not comprehend the

context, I’ll draw the parallel for you. SEBI disguised as the vindictive,

devious Shylock, drags Antonio (in this case Sahara) to reinforce his absurd

claim to Antonio’s 1 pound of flesh (interestingly the pound of flesh here

refers to the approximately 20,000 crores). As readers, we all knew that

Shylock was nothing short of killing Antonio in the court of law. A

befitting analogy to the Sahara Sebi dispute.

As preposterous as the title may sound, the witch hunt against the Sahara

supremo, Subrata Roy Sahara, is inches away of being an ill intentioned

corporate honour killing in progress by the highest authorities perched in

position of power and clout in India. A vicious attempt to execute an entire

corporate just to see it go on its knees bleeding, only to entertain the

prejudicial whims of a few.

Before this takes any form of further elaboration, an immediate look at the

economic quicksand we as an economy are in may add some perspective to what

you all will feed your minds with further down this piece. On one hand,

unemployment, fiscal deficits, an all time low in entrepreneurship and

inflation are some of the fiends we hope to fight off in the ongoing

elections. The gap between the haves and the have nots only deepens. On the

other hand, we have a senseless, irrational litigation running in the courts

against Sahara at the behest of SEBI, which until now has served absolutely

no purpose, lacks any grain of logic or fiscal sensibility and appears to be

making a mockery of our judicial system.

The Supreme Court epitomizes the judicial soul of the country.  An extremely

powerful entity that has the privilege and the clout of imparting judicial

discourse and lending sensibility in much senseless times we live in. What

does not make sense is when these minds of logic and intellect facilitate in

pronouncing judgement and infer, rather impose, guilt upon Sahara without

any grain of proof and assist an absurd claim of a regulator to a pound of

flesh that a) only reveals the regulator’s prejudicial & draconian approach

towards fiscal regulation in a free democratic country and b) severely

impairs the business sensibilities and economics of growth and development.

Subrata Roy, perhaps is the only corporate leader who comes from the region

of UP, Bihar, Rajasthan or MP. He can be attributed to have brought UP onto

the map of corporate leadership apart from its pre-existing electoral might

that UP is already known for. He has infact spawned employment for thousands

of people, catalyzed entrepreneurs, contributed massively to state revenues

and GDP and heavily fuelled CSR initiatives not just at a state but at a

national level too. He has gifted the poor with economic empowerment and

generated a fiscal device of investment and savings for these have nots.

 SEBI’s claims about Sahara’s business practices hold no metal & more

dangerously are premised on an assumption. Having failed to verify the

thousands of documents and the veracity of the Sahara investors, SEBI has

assumed to put the blame of its malfunction on an assumption that these

investors are “fictitious”. This coming from the national regulator is an

extremely hazardous premise. How can a regulator be so negligent and

irrational in hurling such grave allegations when they themselves have not

fulfilled the obligations of due diligence that is pending at their end.

Having failed to do so, they have not only declared a war against a

corporate whose business, in the absence of any proof, stands absolutely

legitimate but have also cloaked their incompetency by pronouncing Sahara

guilty. Again, no proof of that too!

Assumptions are dangerous toys in the hands of a mindless child here. It is

the knife with which SEBI intends of extract its pound of flesh. For moment

here, let’s walk into the dangerous premise of that assumption and assume

that SEBI is granted its wish. It takes its pound of flesh of Sahara. Sahara

compromises and pays the disputed amount to SEBI. Now, having done that what

I would really like to know is how does SEBI plans to distribute this money

amongst the investors, who it in the first place, according to SEBI, were

fictitious? More so, if even we assume that by some work of miracle they do

locate these investors, shoves the money down their throats which, to begin

with, these depositors intended to keep invested, where do these depositors

take this money? This question is important because these investors are

daily rickshaw pullers, small roadside vendors and daily wage earners who

probably do not hold a 7 vault safe in their houses. If they have permanent

houses in the first place is also dubious. They are not account holders and

definitely lurking around the poverty line. Has SEBI worked on an alternate

investment plan for these investors if they wish to continue investing their

money? How does SEBI plans to ensure the financial health, whatever little

they may have? For future where do these small depositors go for their

savings because the only avenue they had as Sahara is already standing with

more than its pound of flesh missing and hemorrhaging to death?

A regulator and especially the courts cannot drop the burden of substantial

proof, moral & social obligations of their assessments and most certainly

cannot entertain prejudicial whims and eccentricities. Their roles have been

carved and evolved in a democratic society only to protect, serve and

nurture. Witch hunts and executions have no room where “Where words come out

from the depth of truth, Where tireless striving stretches its arms towards

perfection, Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way, Into the

dreary desert sand of dead habit...”. Sent on my BlackBerry® from Vodafone