Railway bribery: Pawan Kumar Bansal's nephew Vikram Bansal refutes some of the charges

CHANDIGARH: Having been at the receiving end of BJP leader Satya Pal Jain’s flak that the entire Bansal clan was making money in their name of railway minister Pawan Kumar Bansal, one of his nephews, Vikram Bansal, today refuted some of the charges.

First of all, he denied any financial association with Vijay Singla who has been arrested for allegedly accepting a bribe of Rs 90 lakh. He said, “I am a director in JTL Infra which is promoted by my cousin Vijay Singla and others. I being the son of the elder brother of Pawan Kumar Bansal do not establish business relationships between my uncle’s family and Vijay Singla on the mere basis of my being an Independent Director of JTL Infra. SEBI guidelines very clearly indicate that an independent director has nothing to do with the financials. Mr Jain should know that well.”

He also clarified his position in the companies he was directly involved in. “Me and my chartered accountant brother director were directly involved in Bansi Raunak Energy group, which dealt in bio diesel. I was the whole time director in the company. But since raw material was not easily available, the venture never took off. Bansi Raunaq Energy group was floated by the sons of two brothers – my father and my uncle Pawan Kumar Bansal. Vijay Singla or his family are not a part of it.”

Then he talked about the other charge made by the BJP leader that the address in company records was the same as that of the railway minister's address. Vikram Bansal said, “As regards the address 64, Sector 28-A, Chandigarh, Jain conveniently ignores a fact known to him that this house is jointly owned by my uncle Pawan Kumar Bansal and my mother, Reshma Bansal. He has been pursuing my uncle’s returns with an eagle’s eye. My father, who passed away last year, was elder to Pawan Bansal, and as such the 50 percent ownership of that house is in my mother's name.”

Vikram further claimed that Satya Pal Jain excels in distorting facts even if it results in a ludicrous situation. “As a senior lawyer, he is unaware of the distinction between a functional director with equity participation and an Independent Director who statutorily cannot have any pecuniary interest in the company. As a desperately over ambitious politician, he cares little about being truthful.”

In a parting shot he concluded saying, “The allegation that we all work in the elections for our uncle is correct, but did Jain expect us to campaign for him instead? Jain may not appreciate family values. We do.”