Wipro's stunning silence over death of an employee

Yogesh Sapkale
 

The IT giant had reportedly admitted that one 

of its employees committed suicide after the company 

caught him embezzling $4 million in December. 

However, till date no criminal charges have been filed

against the employee.

It has been over two months since the body of 26-year-old

Anup Kumar Agarwal was recovered from railway

tracks between Byappanahalli and Krishnarajapuram stations. 

Mr Agarwal was working with IT giant Wipro Ltd

as an assistant manager in the finance department.

According to media reports, Mr Agarwal 

committed suicide shortly after the company

caught him embezzling $4 million (about Rs18 crore)

from its account.

Last week, Wipro had said it was conducting

internal investigations into alleged fraud by the 

employee who had gained access to a colleague's 

online password, and had embezzled funds for over a year.

The entire team of six employees that worked with 

Mr Agarwal has been sacked for negligence, said a news report.

Wipro had managed to recover around 50% of the 

embezzled amount and was not sure whether to file

charges in the case. However, there is a stunning 

silence over the whole episode and netizens are

raising questions over the company's responsibility.

From the limited facts narrated in the newspapers,

it appears that the offence is made out at least under

Section 379 of the India Penal Code (IPC) and 

Section 66 of the Information Technology Act, 2000.

Depending upon the facts to be revealed in this case,

Section 381 IPC (Theft by clerk or servant of property

in possession of master) may perhaps also be invoked and 

there could also possibly be a forgery-related offence. 

"However, none of these offences is covered in the legal 

obligations cast on members of the general public under 

Section 39 of the Criminal Penal Code, to report the 

offence to the police. Therefore, it may be difficult to hold 

Wipro legally responsible for not reporting the matter to the 

police, its moral obligation notwithstanding," said a legal expert.

Wipro officials were not immediately available for comments. 

We are not sure whether by not reporting the matter to the

authorities, the company was trying to recover its money or

shield its employee and reputation.

"The issue of non-reporting of such a matter to the police

may perhaps be stretched and called an act of 'mismanagement',

more so if a mala fide intention to save the employee (or the like) 

could be attributed to the management," said the legal expert.

According to a PTI report, the police had said that

Mr Agarwal has committed suicide, and his wife had 

given a statement in writing that her husband was going

through financial problems and was worried and hence 

had resorted to the extreme step.

The post-mortem report said he had died of shock and 

haemorrhage and had suffered multiple fractures.

DC Rajappa, Railway SP, Bangalore, told PTI that

Wipro had so far neither registered any complaint with 

the Railway Police nor asked for a probe. 

On the next course of action, he said no complaint 

was filed until now and the police will act on receiving one.

However, the death of Mr Agarwal and Wipro's silence

over the period has once again raised questions about corporate

governance procedures, especially after the Satyam fiasco.

Wipro not looking to file complain against CA employee who siphoned off around $4 million

 

Feb20,2010

Wipro, the information technology to soaps conglomerate, 

says it is unlikely, at least for now, to file a formal complaint 

against the employee who recently siphoned off 

around $4 million (around Rs 18 crore) from the 

company’s bank account by accessing a colleague’s password.

Instead, it says it is satisfied with the progress it has made by
resorting to ‘dialogue’ with the employee as suggested by
an internal investigation team, aided by external counsels.
Based on the suggestions of the team, the company claims
it managed to recover almost half the siphoned money.

The company said the employee had been dismissed after
the fraud came to light but did not comment on his whereabouts.

“We have an investigation team which is looking at the matter.
Based on its recommendations, we have taken, and are taking
appropriate action, against the said employee,”
Rajendra K Shreemal, VP and Corporate Treasurer of Wipro told .
He added that the company had not filed a case either with the
local police or with the state police’s cybercrime cell against the
employee. The cybercrime cell confirmed this.

A qualified chartered accountant (CA), the ‘fraudster’ had

joined Wipro a little over three years ago, and this was his first job.

He was a junior employee in Wipro’s multimember ‘Controllership’
division in the finance department, which is responsible for maintaining
its financial books and has powers to authorise payments.

Though he reported to the chief controller, a person familiar with the
structure in Wipro’s financial department said “he was given
an independent role in the company’s treasury department” as
the company considered him “extremely intelligent” and “trustworthy”.

“However, history has taught us that ‘brainy and smart guys’
commit financial frauds and so has been the case with Wipro”.

Had Wipro done a proper background verification of the employee?
Shreemal says: “He was very good, with a good family background
and reference. This is just a one-off case, and this was clearly a use
of non-adhering to company policy.”

Experts say while the role of the audit committee that failed to get
a whiff of the happenings is under question, this has also raised
doubt about the internal audit system in the company.

A chartered accountant, who wished not to be named, said:
“Big organisations like Wipro have a strong internal audit
division which reports directly to the company chairman.

It falls within their ambit to check financial misappropriation
like this, since this might have happened off the balance sheet
and hence which did not enter the audit.”

Meanwhile, Wipro replaced all employees in the affected
division, which is also normally due at some stage.
The leadership of the controllership division was also changed.