The Supreme Court of India on Friday declared that allegations of a massive banking fraud involving the Anil Dhirubhai Ambani Group (ADAG) require a “thorough investigation” to maintain public confidence. The observation came after the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) revealed that the estimated loss in seven pending cases has reached approximately Rs 27,337 crore.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi was hearing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) filed by former bureaucrat E A S Sarma. The petition seeks a court-monitored probe into alleged loan frauds exceeding Rs 40,000 crore across various ADAG entities.
Providing a status update to the court, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the central agencies, disclosed the scale of the ongoing probe. Out of nine First Information Reports (FIRs) registered so far, charge sheets have been filed in two, while seven remain under active investigation.
To expedite the process, authorities have formed multiple investigative teams and conducted searches at 14 locations. The crackdown has already seen the issuance of 31 lookout circulars and the collection of nearly 3,960 documents. While two individuals have been arrested to date, the CBI provided a tentative timeline for filing the remaining charge sheets.
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has previously highlighted specific defaults, including Rs 7,500 crore in Reliance Home Finance and Rs 8,200 crore in Reliance Commercial Finance, alleging a “large-scale diversion of public funds.”
The proceedings saw a sharp exchange between Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the petitioner, and the bench regarding the arrest of industrialist Anil Ambani. Bhushan termed it “puzzling” that despite agencies allegedly identifying Ambani as the “kingpin” of the Rs 27,000-crore scam, no arrest had been made.
“Neither the CBI nor the ED is willing to arrest him as if he is a holy cow,” Bhushan argued.
However, the Supreme Court maintained a cautious stance on custodial interrogation. The bench emphasized that it would be “extremely shy” in directing an arrest unless the investigating agency specifically requests it.
“If we activate the investigating agencies like bloodhounds, it will be contrary to the law we are laying down,” the bench remarked, referring to established legal precedents that protect against arbitrary detention. The Court noted that the focus should remain on a disciplined collection of evidence rather than “sensationalising” the probe.
Representing Anil Ambani, Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal countered the allegations, stating that the industrialist is fully cooperating with the investigation. Sibal questioned the petitioner’s access to legal documents, specifically asking how a copy of a charge sheet was obtained before a court had even taken cognizance of it.
“Maybe I (Ambani) was cheated,” Sibal suggested, arguing against what he described as a singular agenda to see his client arrested.
The PIL alleges a systematic diversion of public funds and the fabrication of financial statements between 2013 and 2017, involving a Rs 31,580 crore loan from a consortium led by the State Bank of India.
The Supreme Court, which had previously expressed displeasure over the perceived “reluctance” of agencies to probe the matter, confirmed it would continue to monitor the progress of the investigation.
“The matter requires a thorough investigation and they [probe agencies] should do it in a timely manner so that there is public confidence,” the bench concluded.
Anil Ambani has already provided an assurance to the court that he will not leave the country without prior permis
