By PTI
NEW DELHI: Two firms controlled by former Union minister P Chidambaram’s son Karti received Rs 1.16 crore as bribes in the Aircel-Maxis money laundering case, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) said in its chargesheet filed before a Delhi court on Wednesday.
The chargesheet also mentions P Chidambaram, who was recently questioned in the INX media and the Aircel-Maxis money laundering cases, but does not name him as an accused.
The court will consider the chargesheet on July 4, Additional Sessions Judge Ruby Alka Gupta said.
According to the probe report, the bribe was routed through two firms controlled by Karti — `26 lakh to Advantage Strategic Consultancies Private Limited (ASCPL) by the parent company of Aircel Ltd — Aircel Televentures Ltd (ATVL) — and `90 lakh to Chess Management Services Pvt Limited (CMSPL) by Maxis and its associate Malaysian companies.
Karti controlled ASCPL and CMSPL, special public prosecutors Nitesh Rana and N K Matta said, adding he was trying to project this as untainted money.
The ED said it may file supplementary chargesheets in the case, which apparently leaves room for arraying more persons as accused.
The agency also named ASCPL and its directors Padma Bhaskararamana and Ravi Viswanathan, and CMSPL and its director Annamalai Palaniappa in the chargesheet under Section 4 (punishment for money laundering) of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).
The ED had registered the case under the sections of PMLA on February 7, 2012 on basis of an FIR registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).
The agency said `1.16 crore allegedly belonging to Karti has already been attached by it so far, adding he was alienating the property involved in the money laundering in order to frustrate the proceedings under PMLA.
How dirty money was routed
Karti received D26 lakh from ATVL in ASCPL, on April 11, 2006. “Similarly, CMSPL received an amount of approximately $2,02,447 between 2007-11 against invoices raised between 2007-09. The payments were received from Maxis and its associates in guise of charges for a software designed for use by an Indian company and could not be of any use by a Malaysian company,” the chargesheet said.
