Delhi court releases Maltese national accused in PMLA's Ratul Puri probe | Latest Delhi News

Moser Baer was promoted by Ratul Puri, the businessman and nephew of senior Congressman and former Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister Kamal Nath.

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) arrested banker Nitin Bhatnagar at Delhi airport on August 22 last year. It was alleged that Bhatnagar, a Maltese national, had “facilitated” the opening of a bank account for a company called Pristine River Investments Ltd at the Bank of Singapore as he was its account manager and was actively involved in laundering proceeds of crime for the benefit of Ratul Puri.

The ED investigation stems from a First Information Report (FIR) filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in August 2019, which alleged that Moser Baer India Ltd (MBIL) and its promoters had allegedly cheated and misused the loan they had taken from the Central Bank of India for ₹354.51 crore. Both the CBI and the ED had arrested Ratul Puri, his father Deepak Puri and mother Nita (Kamal Nath's sister).

Senior advocate Vikas Pahwa, appearing for Bhatnagar, argued before the court that he was working in Dubai and all the transactions took place there; his role was limited to that of a relationship arm and he was acting in a professional capacity. Pahwa further claimed that no documents (by ED) were placed on record to show that Bhatnagar had the requisite competencies.

In his order directing Bhatnagar's release under PMLA in the case, Special Judge Sanjeev Aggarwal of Rouse Avenue Courts in Delhi said, “It cannot be said that the accused could have committed the offence, i.e., the matter should be brought before the court. That is, the prosecution has not made out any prima facie case to frame the charges against this accused for which he was accused by filing the chargesheet. If there is no suspicion, then why should the accused go through the rigours of a trial?”

“If there is not the slightest legally admissible evidence against him to justify framing of the case, it would in itself be a violation of Article 21 of the Indian Constitution, as it cannot be said that this is the procedure prescribed by law,” the court observed.

The court agreed with Pahwa's arguments and found that Bhatnagar only worked as a relationship manager at the Bank of Singapore and did not control any of the companies involved in the transactions.

“There was no instrument or device nor any clairvoyance by which he could have known that it was dirty or illicit money or money derived from crime. The accused was not a Nostradamus who could have known that it was money derived from crime. The accused was not a director, promoter, employee or family member of the promoters or directors who could have known that the said persons were diverting money to various places and taking it to Dubai and other places for laundering, nor was the accused named in any capacity in the predicate offence/FIR,” the court said in its order.

The court also highlighted that the transactions took place between 2012 and 2023, while the predicate offence (CBI case) in this case was filed in 2019, so Bhatnagar could not have known that it was laundered money he was dealing in.

“In this way, no international transactions can take place between two individuals or two companies, which would have a detrimental effect on international trade and traffic, since neither party could know that the transaction they are carrying out is carried out with laundered money,” the judge said.