The 2010 conferment on an Indian-American businessman Sant Singh Chatwal, who was awarded the Padma Bhushan in the field of Public Affairs, created much controversy. Known for his association with former US President Bill Clinton and his wife Hillary Clinton, Chatwal pled guilty to violating the Federal Election Campaign Act and witness tampering during the 2008 United States presidential election. He was also accused of lobbying for the award by leveraging "his contacts in the Prime Minister's Office and United States Congress." The Government provided the clarification regarding the conferment and issued a press release which mentioned Chatwal as a "tireless advocate" of the country's interest in the United States. The statement also mentioned that "due diligence" exercise is carried out for each of the awardees and out of five Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) registered cases against Chatwal between 1992 and 1994, three were closed by CBI itself and in remaining two cases, Chatwal was discharged by the Court and as per the reports that were made available to the selection committee, there is nothing adverse on record against him. According to media reports, there were several cases filed or registered after April 2009 which includes three criminal complaints with Kerala Police and four cases in Delhi High Court and Kerala High Court. Chatwal also served summons in January 2010. However, the then Union Home Secretary Gopal Krishna Pillai said that "no probe has been ordered nor any report sought from anyone." Earlier in 2008, Chatwal was considered for the Padma Shri but the Indian Embassy in Washington, D.C. declined to nominate Chatwal when asked by the Prime Minister's Office. The then Indian Ambassador to the United States Ronen Sen had told PMO that the conferral would not be appropriate because of the controversy associated with his financial dealings in India and America. Sen had also mentioned that though positive, Chatwal's contribution are much less compared to other Indian-Americans. The bestowal would not only "demoralise the others who had done much more" but also would create "the impression that India did not regard lack of transparency in financial dealings as a disqualification for its highest honours."