BM Farooq is the richest among Rajya Sabha candidates

[email protected] (CD Network)
June 1, 2016

Mangaluru: Jun 1: Congress MLA BA Mohiuddin Bava's younger brother BM Farooq, who is contesting the Rajya Sabha elections on a JD(S) ticket, is the richest among the candidates who have filed their nominations so far.

bmfarooq1Mr Farooq's total assets are valued at around Rs 750.2 crore, as per the details available on the Karnataka legislature website. Farooq, who filed his nominations on Monday, holds Bachelor of Engineering (Mechanical) and Master of Business Administration degrees. He is the CMO of Fiza Developers and Infratech Pvt Ltd, and the owner of Mangaluru United cricket team.

The total value of immovable assets owned by him and his wife Fousia Farooq are worth Rs 688.14 crore.

He is a shareholder in 16 companies, where his shares are worth Rs 21.75 crore. His wife owns shares worth Rs 2.79 crore. Farooq has declared that his movable assets are valued at around Rs 68 crore.

He owns luxurious assets such as Rado, Rolex, Vangeneous, Cherooli watches, an iPhone, and jewellery worth Rs. 1.05 crore. He also owns a row of high-end cars, including Range Rover (Rs. 1.12 crore), Volkswagen Beetle (Rs. 21 lakh), and Toyota Camry (Rs. 24.14 lakh). All his cars bear the fancy registration number 5555.

B.M. Farooq — JD(S)

* Richest among five candidates who have filed nomination papers.

* Combined value of movable assets (including that of wife Fousia Farooq) — Rs. 750.2 cr.

* Immovable assets — Rs. 544.67 cr. (wife's Rs. 74.37 cr.).

* Liabilities — Rs. 87.06 cr. (wife's Rs. 65.4 cr.).

* Annual income — Rs. 3.38 cr. (wife's Rs. 59.94 cr.).

K.C. Ramamurthy — Congress

* Combined value of movable assets (including that of wife Sabitha Ramamurthy) — Rs. 82 cr.

* Retired IPS officer is chairman of CMR Group of Institutions.

* Total income is Rs. 68.13 lakh (wife's - Rs. 4.2 cr.).

* Movable assets — Rs. 21.06 cr.; immovable assets — Rs. 56.19 cr.

* Liabilities declared — Rs. 12.7 cr.

Oscar Fernandes — Congress

* Total income — Rs. 6.35 lakh (wife's income is Rs. 7.86 lakh).

* Value of movable assets in his and wife's name is Rs. 2.95 lakh. Liabilities — Rs. 5.04 cr.

Jairam Ramesh — Congress

* Movable assets — Rs. 5.79 cr.

* Rs. 25,000 in cash and drives a low-end car worth Rs. 4 lakh.

* Total income — Rs. 53.01 lakh, with movable assets worth Rs. 4.74 cr. in his name. His wife Jayashree K.R. has movable assets worth Rs. 8.93 lakh.

Also Read :

BM Farooq issue: Mohiuddin Bava will not betray Congress, says KPCC chief

CM takes on MLA Bava over BM Farooq contesting RS polls on JD(S) ticket

Comments

kris putnam
 - 
Saturday, 10 Mar 2018

wife (in Burka) earning 59 crore per annum WOW!

Kris Putnam
 - 
Saturday, 10 Mar 2018

Farooq's wifes annual income 59 crore (sitting in Burka at home) !! - how is that?

 

 

I will ask my wife to do that. can I get hat kind of income from my wife... Unless she (obviously he) is doing something else!

Mohammed Ali Kulai
 - 
Thursday, 2 Jun 2016

Wish you All the Best!!!

Mohammed Ali Kulai
 - 
Wednesday, 1 Jun 2016

Congrats !.....Wish u all the Best!!!

Sathish
 - 
Wednesday, 1 Jun 2016

Best of luck sir.
We are going to be employees of your company

SK
 - 
Wednesday, 1 Jun 2016

Good Fekugiri by the cunning and useless OSCAR

Nation First
 - 
Wednesday, 1 Jun 2016

A prominent member of a Chor family of Surathkal. Cheating is their family business.

Samad
 - 
Wednesday, 1 Jun 2016

please calculate his zakath, as its compulsory obligation in islam , and send the poor people, at his door step, its their rights! just in case if he do not pay zakath, then how can we expect he will work for poor?? once he gets elected..???

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
July 31,2020

Hassan, July 31: A police sub-inspector (PSI) reportedly hanged himself at his official quarters in Channarayapatna town today morning.

The deceased has been identified as Kiran Kumar, 34, who was in charge of Channarayapatna rural police station.

Sources said that he was upset after two murder cases were reported in the last 24 hours in his limits. Kiran reportedly told colleagues an hour before the extreme step that he feared he would be suspended.  

According to locals, the SI was upset after news of the two murders due to alleged negligence of the police spread on social media. He killed himself before a visit by senior officials. IGP, southern range, and SP Srinivasagowda was planning to visit the town and the spots where the murders took place on Friday.

Kiran, a native of Lalanakere village in Arsikere taluk, was known for his rapport with local people. He was alone when the incident took place. His wife and children had gone to Lalanakere for the Varamahalakashmi festival on Thursday night. The body was shifted to the mortuary for a postmortem.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
July 15,2020

Bengaluru, Jul 15: With the state capital along with a few districts under lockdown to control the spread of Covid-19, Karnataka Home Minister Basavaraj Bommai on Wednesday said the measure was important to break the chain and people seem to have understood its importance.

Appealing for cooperation from the people, he asked them not to make it inevitable for police to use force in implementing the lockdown. "Traffic movement is less, there is a lockdown atmosphere everywhere, I feel that people have understood the importance... cooperation is required. I appeal to the people, if this lockdown has to be effective it has to be voluntary, only then we can control the rapid spread of coronavirus," Bommai said.

Speaking to reporters here, he said this lockdown is important, last time the infection was not up to this level. "This time areas that have a high number of infections- about five districts and Bengaluru city are going for lockdown. People have understood that this lockdown is to break the chain," he said. "Please don't make it inevitable for police to use force," he added.

Bengaluru urban and rural areas are under "complete lockdown" since last night at 8 pm and it will be effective till 5 am on July 22.

Following Bengaluru urban and rural, administrations in several districts like Dharwad, Dakshina Kannada, Kalaburagi (only in Urban areas), Bidar, Raichur (in Raichur city and Sindhanur) and Yadgir too have announced lockdown.

Noting that Police have taken all necessary strict measures to enforce lockdown in Bengaluru urban and rural districts by restricting the movement of vehicles and people, Bommai said barricades have been erected at various places and flyovers have been shut. People have been allowed to purchase vegetables and groceries till 12 noon, he said.

The government has warned of action in case of any violation of the lockdown rules. As of July 14 evening, cumulatively 44,077 Covid-19 positive cases have been confirmed in the state, which includes 842 deaths and 17,390 discharges. Bengaluru Urban district tops the list of positive cases, with a total of 20,969 infections.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
February 19,2020

Bengaluru, Feb 19: Pointing out that there was a deliberate attempt to cover up police excesses by implicating innocent persons at whim, the Karnataka High Court on Tuesday granted conditional bail to 21 people who were accused by police of involving in violence during the protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) in Mangaluru.

Allowing the bail petitions of Ashik and 20 others from Udupi and Dakshina Kannada districts, Justice John Michael Cunha said the overzealousness of the police is also evident from the fact that FIRs were registered under Section 307 of IPC against the persons killed by the police themselves.

“In an offence involving a large number of people, the identity and participation of each accused must be fixed with reasonable certainty. In the present cases, the identity appears to have been fixed on the basis of their affiliation to PFI and they being members of the Muslim community. Though it is stated that the involvement of the petitioners is captured in CCTV footage and photographs, no such material is produced before the court showing the presence of any of the petitioners at the spot, armed with deadly weapons,” the judge noted.

In the statement of objections filed by the State Public Prosecutor-I, it was stated that there was a hint of Muslim youths holding protest on December 19, 2019, opposing the implementation of CAA. Prohibitory orders were clamped in that connection. This assertion indicated that the common object of the assembly was to oppose the implementation of CAA and National Register for Citizens (NRC) which, by itself, was not an “unlawful object”, the judge pointed out.

‘Pics show cops throwing stones at crowd’

Justice Cunha also said the material collected by the investigators did not contain any specific evidence regarding the presence of any of the petitioners at the spot. On the other hand, omnibus allegations were made against the Muslim crowd of 1,500-2,000, alleging that they were armed with weapons like stones, soda bottles and glass pieces. The photographs produced by the SPP depicted that hardly any member of the crowd were armed with weapons, except one of them holding a bottle. In none of these photographs, police station or policemen were seen in the vicinity, the judge noted.

“On the other hand, photographs produced by the petitioners show that the policemen themselves were pelting stones at the crowd. The petitioners have produced copies of the complaints lodged by the dependants of the deceased who died due to police firing and the endorsement made thereon reveals that even though the law required the police to register independent FIRs in view of the specific complaint made against the police officers making out cognizable offences, the police have failed to register FIRs. This goes to show that a deliberate attempt is underway to cover up police excesses by implicating innocent persons at the whims and caprice of the police,” the judge observed.

In the wake of counter-allegations against the police and in the backdrop of their failure to register FIRs based on complaints lodged by the families of victims, the possibility of false and mistaken implication could not be ruled out, the judge said. In these circumstances, it would be a travesty of justice to deny bail to the petitioners and sacrifice their liberties to the mercy of the district administration and police. The records indicate that a deliberate attempt has been made to trump up evidence and to deprive the liberties of the petitioners by fabricating evidence. None of the petitioners have any criminal antecedents, the court said.

“The allegations levelled against the petitioners are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. There is no direct evidence to connect them with the alleged offence. The investigation appears to be malafide and partisan. In the circumstances, in order to protect the rights and liberties of the petitioners, it is necessary to admit them to bail,” the judge said.

The petitioners were arrested and remanded in judicial custody after the anti-CAA protests on charges of being members of an unlawful assembly, armed with lethal weapons, attempting to set fire to the North Police Station in Mangaluru, obstructing the police from discharging their duties and causing damage to public property, etc., on December 19 in violation of the prohibitory orders. They moved the High Court as their bail pleas had been rejected by a sessions court in Dakshina Kannada.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.