Sahara chief Subrata Roy on Tuesday apologised to the Supreme Court for failing to appear before it for a hearing.
The apex court had issued a non-bailable warrant against him, after he failed to turn up.
The reason he gave for skipping the hearing was that he was meeting doctors over the condition of his 92-year-old mother, as well as a lawyer.
Police went looking for Roy on Thursday at his sprawling Sahara Shaher estate in Lucknow. He turned himself in on Friday and denied he had been “absconding,” and was taken to a government guest house in a forested area on the outskirts of Lucknow.
He spent the weekend in custody at a government nature-reserve guest house in Lucknow.
A person identified by news channels as Manoj Sharma, a lawyer from Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh, threw ink at Roy who was being taken to the court, while some aggrieved investors were heard shouting “he is a thief, he has usurped people’s hard-earned money”.
The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) says Sahara failed to comply with a 2012 court order to repay billions of dollars to investors. Sahara says it repaid most investors and that its remaining liability was less than the 5,120 crore rupees it deposited with SEBI.
“The question is money. Where is the money and when will it be paid,” said Dushyant Dave, a Supreme Court lawyer who has represented Sahara in the past.
The Supreme Court, which has expressed frustration at Sahara’s conduct, had ordered Sahara to disclose the details and source of funds from which it said it repaid investors, but a lawyer for the regulator told the court in late January that Sahara had not given the details.
Sahara had offered to give SEBI title deeds of properties it said were worth 200 billion rupees as security, but the regulator said the properties were far over-valued. The court also ordered that Sahara not sell any of its property.
SEBI declined to comment on the case on Monday and a Sahara spokesman did not reply to calls and emails seeking comment.
Sahara’s core business includes selling financial products, largely to small investors in towns and rural areas. It was two such products, later ruled illegal, that drew SEBI’s attention.
Critics, including activist groups, argue Sahara’s investment products are designed to evade regulatory oversight and that the company lacks transparency on the source and use of funds.
