Premium

Supreme Court seeks CBI, ED status reports on probe into alleged banking fraud by Anil Ambani Group

Anil Ambani bank fraud case Supreme Court, EAS Sarma PIL Reliance ADAG, CBI ED status report Anil Ambani, SBI forensic audit Anil Ambani, Reliance Communications bank fraud FIR, Prevention of Corruption Act bank officials.

4 min readNew DelhiJan 23, 2026 04:05 PM IST

Supreme Court sought status reports on probes conducted against Anil Dhirubhai Ambani Group companies and their promoter, Anil Ambani, for alleged bank loan frauds. (File Photo)

The Supreme Court Friday sought status reports from the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on the probes they are conducting against Anil Dhirubhai Ambani Group companies and their promoter, Anil Ambani, for alleged bank loan frauds.

A bench of Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi, which was hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) plea filed by former Union secretary E A S Sarma seeking a court-monitored probe, directed that the reports be submitted in a sealed cover.

Appearing for Sarma, Advocate Prashant Bhushan pointed out that, though the court had issued notice on the plea on November 18, 2025, the respondents had not appeared before it.

“This was highly reported in the media, the issue of notice in this case. So it’s not that they do not know. They would certainly know…But apparently these people watch from the sidelines,” he added.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who appeared for the Centre, said he is not opposing Bhushan. Mehta pointed out, “There was a forensic audit, and it did find, as a matter of fact, that there was siphoning of funds, redirecting of funds for other purposes, etc., based upon which SBI has filed FIR with CBI.”

Also Read | CBI registers 2 criminal cases against ADA group, names Anil Ambani’s son Jai Anmol in Rs 228-crore fraud case filed by Union Bank

“After much delay, the forensic report came to be challenged in respect of 3 banks, other than SBI, on the ground that the signatory to the audit report is not a chartered accountant. A stay was granted by a single judge of the Bombay High Court, which the banks challenged before the division bench, and the judgment is reserved. But there is no stay qua fraud declaration by SBI. They filed a writ petition and withdrew it. The CBI FIR stands,” Mehta added.

CJI Surya Kant said that if the Centre is not opposing, the court will have to hear the respondents.

Story continues below this ad

“More than Rs 1.5 lakh crore of debts of these companies have been written off in the bankruptcy proceedings. The web of transactions is so fraudulent, so many shell companies opened…money siphoned off, etc.,” Bhushan said.

The counsel said CBI registered an FIR in June 2025 based on an audit report that the Bank of Baroda had received in 2020. “And even in this FIR, they have not named any public servant nor registered it under the Prevention of Corruption Act… The period of review was 2016-2019. And the report says yes, thousands of crores of loans have been siphoned off in this manner by opening shell companies.”

When Bhushan urged the court to seek status reports from CBI and ED, the court agreed and also issued fresh notices to the respondents, directing the Registrar General of the Bombay High Court to ensure they were served. The court also asked the Registrar General to file a compliance report.

The court noted that “as per office report”, the respondents “were duly served on December 19”. “They have, however, for reasons best known to them, not entered an appearance.”

Story continues below this ad

The bench said that “in the interest of justice and as a last opportunity,” they are “permitted to enter appearance” on the next date and file their counter affidavit, if any.

The court will hear the matter after 10 days.