Subrata Roy argued his case himself for more than half an hour despite being flanked by six of the country’s top lawyers, but still ended up in Tihar jail on Tuesday.
Clad in his trademark waistcoat and a tie with the Sahara logo, the 65-year-old “managing worker”of the Sahara India Pariwar made impassioned appeals to the court on five occasions in the course of the 100-minute hearing. Subrata Roy urged the court to “have faith” in him and “hang” him if he did not keep his promises.
Subrata Roy’s monologue included a “slip of tongue” which earned him a reprimand from Justices K S Radhakrishnan and J S Khehar. He told the court that it would “love” the Sahara group if it heard the “beautiful” story of their paying from their pockets to refund investors. The court’s response: “We will love you only if you make the entire payment... if you maintain the rule of law.”
Subrata Roy’s day at the court began with a man throwing black ink at his face while shouting, “he has cheated and robbed us”. Subrata Roy used a handkerchief to wipe the stain off his face, combed his hair, and walked into the packed courtroom, accompanied by his son Seemanto, and chewing something.
Police grabbed the ink-thrower — who was later identified as Manoj Sharma, a Gwalior man who had thrown a shoe at Congress MP Suresh Kalmadi in 2011 — and took him away, but not before a few Sahara employees had landed several hard blows on him.
In the court, Subrata Roy waved to his lawyers — senior advocates Ram Jethmalani, Ravi Shankar Prasad, Rajeev Dhawan, C A Sundaram, S Ganesh and R Dwivedi, besides their briefing counsel — and was seen discussing strategy.
As the proceedings began, Roy said with folded hands, “My apologies for not remaining present on the last date. Believe me that I had genuine reasons. I tender my unconditional apology. Please accept it.”
The court accepted the apology but rejected Sahara’s plea for more time to refund investors’ money. Roy pleaded for a “sympathetic” view of the financial constraints in paying the entire sum up front, and tried to persuade the court to see the “business point of view”.
“We will pay you the entire money by selling the properties,” Subrata Roy said.
The Bench shot back: “Stop telling you will pay us. You cannot pay anything to us. You are