Sudhir Ruparelia’s lawyers have filed an application in the Commercial court demanding that Bank of Uganda provides proof that the businessman stole Shs 300bn from Crane bank.
The application, filed on July 21, comes a day after the central bank’s legal team served Kampala Associated Advocates (KAA), Ruparelia’s lawyers, with court summons to respond to BoU’s case on July 20.
In the application, KAA lawyers claim that BoU’s case is full of “narratives” and “conjectures” devoid of any specifics, which are needed for them to come up with a reasonable defence.
According to the lawyers, the plaint and court summons don’t have key annexures, which spell out the case against Ruparelia. In their three-page application, KAA lawyers say they want a total of 26 documents from BoU in order for them to come up with a robust defence.
KAA also want the forensic report written by PricewaterhouseCoopers, which audited Crane bank when BoU took over its operations last year.
The forensic report, according to Bank Uganda, showed how Ruparelia operated phony bank accounts within Crane bank, purposely to conceal what it called fraudulent transactions and Crane bank’s real financials from the central bank.
Ruparelia’s representatives argue that Bank of Uganda must disclose the report in order for them to verify if indeed those were the findings.
In its suit, the central bank claimed that more than Shs 8.2bn was taken out of Crane bank on December 27, 2014 disguised as credit facilities to Infinity Investments Limited and eventually written off as a bad debt under Ruparelia’s instructions. Infinity Investments Limited is allegedly owned by Ruparelia.
Now KAA wants Bank of Uganda to disclose documents that show that indeed their client owns Infinity Investments, and further present the minutes or communication in which he directed the company’s bad debts to be written off.
Though in its plaint Bank of Uganda says that upon taking over Crane Bank last year they were shocked to find that Ruparelia was the sole owner of the defunct bank with personal control over its day-to-day operations, the businessman’s lawyers are demanding for details to prove that charge.
KAA lawyers want to see documents showing explicitly how Ruparelia owned Crane bank alone and how he used to run it on his personal whim as claimed in the suit.
For instance, they want e-mails or any other written communication which show Ruparelia giving instructions to Crane bank staff.
In addition, the lawyers want specifics on the accusation that Ruparelia personally never remitted Shs 52 billion to NSSF despite deducting the sum from Crane bank workers.
The specifics, according to the application, should show NSSF’s monthly schedule, the monthly payroll [of Crane bank] and also other documents indicating who took the NSSF money.
On the alleged transfer of freehold titles of 48 plots of land (branches), purchased and developed using Crane bank’s finances, into the name of Meera Investments, only to be leased back to Crane bank at high cost, the lawyers are, again, asking for evidence.
They want Bank of Uganda to show them all the 48 sale agreements to confirm that indeed Crane bank bought the titles. In the main case to be heard by Justice David Wangutusi, Bank of Uganda is seeking to recover $93.8 million (Shs 337.6bn) and Shs 60.3bn from the former Crane bank proprietor and his real estate company Meera Investments respectively.
Asked to comment on this development, Timothy Masembe Kanyerezi of MMAKS Advocates, Bank of Uganda’s lawyers, described the application as “baseless”, adding that they would formally respond to it next week.
