Read Time: 06 minutes
Per SFIO and ED’s case, Bhushan Steel's Managing Director Neeraj Singal and associates used 150 shell companies to rotate funds for capital, property, and personal use. Tiwari argued that, while some witness statements suggested his involvement in appointing directors of shell companies, the fact was that Brij Bhushan and Neeraj Singal were in control. Tiwari also maintained that he received compensation similar to other employees. Tiwari also highlighted the SFIO’s complaint which confirmed that control of the companies rested primarily with the Singals.
Pankaj Kumar Tiwari, the former Vice President (Accounts) at Bhushan Steel Limited, presented his argument before Justice Neena Bansal Krishna of the Delhi High Court, asserting his entitlement to bail. It was submitted that while the promoters and other primary accused, including Neeraj Singal, Archana Mittal, and Ajay Mittal, were granted bail, he (Tiwari), as a mere employee of the company, should also be granted the same relief.
Represented by Senior Advocate Sanjay Jain, Tiwari contended that Neeraj Singal’s wife, Ritu, and his mother, Uma (wife of Brij Bhushan), were granted bail at their initial court appearance and were never arrested. While Neeraj Singal was taken into custody, he was recently released by the Supreme Court on September 6, 2024. Tiwari further pointed out that his name was not listed among the accused in the first charge sheet, though certain references were made to his alleged roles.
When the trial court took cognizance of the case on November 7, 2023, it expressed concerns over the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) failure to investigate the roles of certain individuals. This led to the arrest of Tiwari along with Archana and Ajay Mittal. Despite facing serious allegations involving financial irregularities, Archana and Ajay were granted bail by the trial court before Tiwari’s application was considered, but his bail was subsequently denied.
The ED claimed that Bhushan Steel operated around 150 shell companies under Tiwari’s management at Neeraj Singal’s instruction. Senior Advocate Sanjay Jain, however, clarified that Tiwari was only a director in eight Category B companies and one Category C company, and had ceased being a director in any company after 2014.
The ED's case was supported by statements from various witnesses, including those involved in a related investigation by the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO). One such witness, Ruchin Maheshwari, testified that Neeraj and Brij Bhushan Singal controlled 150 companies, of which 62 had appointed directors. Ankur Agarwal was said to have managed the accounting of these companies under Tiwari’s supervision. Another witness, Sunil Saxena, stated that he was appointed a director only nominally by Tiwari and was unaware of the companies' actual operations. Saxena further mentioned that Neeraj Singal controlled the operations and financial activities of the companies.
Additional allegations against Tiwari involved inflating stock statements to increase Bhushan Steel’s drawing power. In his defense, Tiwari stated that during the finalization of the company’s accounts, he had noticed a sudden and unexplained increase in stocks in transit and debtors by approximately ₹5,000 crores. He claimed that this manipulation was carried out under the instructions of Neeraj and Brij Bhushan Singal, with assistance from the late auditor R.K. Mehta and Nitin Johri, who was on medical bail.
Tiwari also highlighted that the ED, in its response, noted that his involvement in routine accounting tasks did not absolve him of liability, as evidence indicated his participation in financial manipulation and money laundering activities. Although Tiwari did not personally benefit from these activities, his involvement in illegal operations was deemed clear.
Please Login or Register
