In a case that has captured nationwide attention, the United Church of Northern India Trust Association (UCNITA) is embroiled in one of the largest financial frauds of 2024. On October 16, 2024, the Additional Sessions Judge Shri N.P. Tribhuwan rejected the anticipatory bail application of Stephen and Christina Singh, two key figures implicated in the massive fraud involving forged documents, bogus directors, and potentially multi-crore rupees worth of misappropriated property.
Fraud Unfolds
The UCNITA, a trust registered under the Companies Act of 1913 and the Mumbai Public Trust Act of 1950, holds vast properties across India. The organization’s leadership remained stable for years, with B. K. Nayak serving as President and Silvan Christen as Vice President. However, in August 2024, the treasurer of UCNITA, Dr. Vishwas Jaidev Sirwaiya, uncovered a web of fraud, launching a formal complaint with the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) and the Registrar of Companies (ROC).
Sirwaiya’s complaint revealed a shocking scheme where the names of UCNITA’s legitimate board members were replaced with those of impostors, including Yohan Immanuel, Tom Salakhial Molommo, Arunkumar Rai, and Amit David. This scheme was executed through the uploading of fraudulent documents to the MCA and ROC portals, including forged board resolutions and fake letterheads. By August 10, 2024, emails from the MCA confirmed that these impostors were now recognized as the legal directors of UCNITA, a discovery that sent shockwaves throughout the organization.
Within days, further emails confirmed the complete takeover of UCNITA. Sirwaiya immediately filed additional complaints with the MCA and the ROC, urging the authorities to reverse the fraudulent changes. As the investigation expanded, it became clear that this was not an isolated incident but part of a larger pattern of fraud that had already targeted other trusts and companies across India, particularly in Rajasthan.
The Scope of the Fraud
The scope of the fraudulent activity is staggering. The impostor directors allegedly used falsified documents to take control of UCNITA’s extensive properties, which are valued in the crores. Among the most significant revelations was the illegal sale of a property in Belgaon worth crores, sold on April 27, 2023, despite assurances from Yohan Immanuel that the trust’s assets would not be sold.
Adding to the gravity of the accusations is the discovery of a fraudulent bank account in UCNITA’s name, opened in 2005 by the conspirators. The investigation has also uncovered evidence of illegal property deals dating back over a decade. In 2011, the impostor directors reportedly used a bogus PAN card to purchase property belonging to the COEMAR Trust in Sangli, which they then sold to a real estate company in Pune.
Anticipatory Bail Rejected
The case culminated in a hearing on October 16, 2024, where the applicants Stephen Singh and Christina Singh sought anticipatory bail in connection with the fraud. According to court records, the applicants were part of a conspiracy to prepare and upload false documents on government portals, including the MCA and ROC websites, thereby erasing the legitimate directors from UCNITA’s records.
During the hearing, the court reviewed the severity of the charges against the Singhs. The prosecution alleged that the Singhs had participated in a broader scheme to misappropriate public property for personal financial gain. The court expressed concern that granting anticipatory bail would undermine the ongoing investigation, which seeks to uncover the full extent of the fraud. The judge noted that the accused, if granted bail, could hinder the investigation by concealing evidence or evading law enforcement.
Citing the seriousness of the allegations and the large sums of public money involved, the court ruled that the applicants were not entitled to anticipatory bail. The judge stated, “Grant of anticipatory bail, particularly in this type of offence, would definitely hamper the effective investigation.” This decision echoes the court’s earlier stance in rejecting similar anticipatory bail pleas by other accused individuals, including Shamik Dasgupta and Rakhi Dasgupta, who were also named as conspirators in the case.
Mumbai Expose had earlier published an article about the rejection of bail for two other persons accused in the case, titled “Anticipatory Bail Rejected in Major UCNITA Fraud Case: Shamik and Rakhi Dasgupta Named.” which can be read here https://mumbaiexpose.com/finance/anticipatory-bail-rejected-in-major-ucnita-fraud-case-shamik-and-rakhi-dasgupta-named/
Leave a Reply