The Supreme Court reprimanded the Central Bureau of Investigation and the Delhi Police Economic Offences Wing for failing to submit progress reports on their investigation into alleged financial irregularities involving the promoters of Sammaan Capital Limited, formerly known as Indiabulls Housing Finance Limited.
A three-judge bench presided over by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant cautioned that it came close to summoning the heads of both investigative agencies over their apparent inaction. The court refrained from issuing the summons only after Additional Solicitor General S. V. Raju, appearing for the agency, assured the bench that a status report would be submitted promptly.
Concerns Over Inaction and Unresolved Allegations
The hearing followed submissions by petitioner counsel Prashant Bhushan, who pointed out that no progress had been placed on record since the federal agency filed its last affidavit in January. Bhushan, who is seeking the creation of a Special Investigation Team to lead the inquiry, also informed the court that key accused Sameer Gehlot has since moved to London.
Senior Advocate A. M. Singhvi, appearing in the matter, stated that Gehlot maintains no current association with Sammaan Capital.
Expressing dismay over the lack of updates between January and late July, the bench—which also comprised Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana—questioned the agencies about the concrete steps taken during this period. Chief Justice Kant characterized the prolonged silence as shocking, noting the gravity of the allegations, which involve fund siphoning, round-tripping of funds, and statutory breaches under the Companies Act.
Agency Defense and Upcoming Hearing
In response to the court, the Additional Solicitor General stated that the Serious Fraud Investigation Office is actively involved and that investigators have examined multiple witnesses. He explained that authorities are currently determining whether a criminal offense was committed given that the underlying loans had been repaid with interest.
The bench questioned how the investigating agencies could remain uncertain about whether an offense occurred after several months of inquiry.
The court adjourned the proceedings and will resume hearing the matter once the promised status report is officially submitted.
