Bookmark and Share

India’s Shadowy Massive Sahara Conglomerate ordered to return $3 billion to its Depositors – that is if they exist

0 Comment

India’s Sahara Group has a huge presence in the media, real estate, financial and hospitality sector. The business conglomerate which is led by Subroto Roy however remains shrouded in mystery about its funding . The group has of late been on a buying spree taking over iconic hotels for hundreds of millions of dollars in New York and London. While it is not proven, there are enough indications that the Sahara group is a recipient of the massive amounts of black money that is generated by Indian politicians. This also helps provide immunity and patronage to the Group from prying investigators.

However the growing huge scale of the conglomerate has forced some of the cleaner institutions in India like the RBI and the Supreme Court to put an end to this blatant swindling. After 7-8 years of investigation and court case, India’s Supreme Court has ordered the Sahara Group to return $3 billion to the depositors which were collected in violation of regulations. While Sahara has stated that is has not done any wrongdoing and has no black money, there are indications by the SC ruling that something is not above board with the Group. The Court has questioned how the name of a depositor could be “Haridwar” which is the name of a city. There are no surnames etc.


Faced with yesterday’s damning verdict ordering him to repay Rs 24,400 crore to investors in two of his companies—Sahara India Real Estate Corporation (SIREC) and Sahara Housing Investment Corporation (SHIC)—within three months and with 15 percent interest, Sahara Group boss Subrata Roy lashed out in all directions.

The Supreme Court was not amused. Judge JS Khehar, one of the two judges on the bench, observed frostily: “Despite restraint, one is compelled to record that the whole affair seems to be doubtful, dubious and questionable. Money transactions are not expected to be casual, certainly not in the manner expressed by the two companies.”

“The name of the introducer/agent, leads to a different impression altogether. ‘Haridwar’, as a name of a person of Indian origin, is quite uncomprehendable (sic). In India names of cities do not ever constitute the basis of individual names. One will never find Allahabad, Agra, Bangalore, Chennai or Tirupati as individual names. The address of the introducer/agent, depicted in the compilation, is as intriguing as the address of the investor.”

Also Read on GWI:




Sneha Shah

I am Sneha, the Editor-in-chief for the Blog. We would be glad to receive suggestions, inputs & comments on GWI from you guys to keep it going! You can contact me for consultancy/trade inquires by writing an email to

No Responses so far | Have Your Say!