Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) leader and Goa in-charge Deepak Singla has suffered a major setback after a Special PMLA Court rejected his bail plea in an alleged ₹155-crore bank fraud and money laundering case. The ruling, delivered by Special Judge Vijayant Sehgal, means Singla will continue to remain in judicial custody while the investigation proceeds.
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) had arrested him on May 18, 2026, following a sequence of coordinated multi-state search raids across his residential and administrative properties in Delhi and Goa.
Registration Begins for FutureCrime Summit 2026, India’s Largest Cybercrime Conference
The Finacle SWIFT Manipulation Pipeline
The case traces its origins to a criminal complaint registered in 2018 concerning a significant financial loss suffered by a public sector bank. Investigators allege that Mahesh Timber Pvt. Ltd. and individuals associated with the company exploited international trade financing arrangements to execute a sophisticated fraud involving credit facilities and foreign banking instruments.
The underlying operational trail reveals that the firm’s Singapore-based subsidiary obtained credit facilities from banks in Singapore backed by standby letters of credit issued by a consortium of Indian banks. To maximize capital extraction, the syndicate conspired with internal financial actors to fraudulently enhance Foreign Letters of Credit (FLCs) through unauthorized SWIFT amendments, completely bypassing the mandatory corresponding entry loops required inside the bank’s core Finacle application network.
Forged Bills of Lading and Fake Timber Shipments
According to the investigation, the value of the foreign letters of credit was allegedly raised from approximately ₹21.47 crore to ₹173.03 crore. The alleged manipulation, authorities contend, bypassed established banking procedures and internal controls, resulting in a loss of around ₹155.21 crore to the lender, Oriental Bank of Commerce (OBC), alongside various consortium financial institutions.
The prosecution further alleges that forged bills of entry, bills of lading, and other import-related documents were used to facilitate the diversion of funds. Verification reviews conducted by Central Customs authorities established that zero physical timber commodities were ever shipped or imported from Singapore to India. Instead, a complex shell network consisting of entities like Amazon Exports Pte. Ltd. and Traffic Media India Pvt. Ltd. was deployed solely to print paper transaction trails and mimic international logistical legitimacy.
Layering Proceeds and Cash Asset Containment
The Enforcement Directorate told the court that Deepak Singla’s role extended beyond that of a nominal participant. According to the agency, he held directorial and managerial positions in entities linked to the alleged fraud and actively participated in financial arrangements designed to disguise the origins of the funds. Investigators claim he was involved in transactions intended to layer and conceal proceeds generated from the alleged criminal activity, specifically tracking nearly ₹2.82 crore routed across accounts tied directly to his personal control.
Search operations conducted on May 18 reportedly led to the recovery of ₹25 lakh in cash and 6,000 Singapore dollars from premises linked to Singla. The agency also informed the court that digital evidence extracted from seized electronic devices, including a mobile phone, remains under examination and may reveal additional details regarding the broader cross-border financial conspiracy.
PMLA Section 45 Twin Conditions Block Bail
Singla’s legal team, however, challenged the arrest and opposed the ED’s claims. The defence argued before the court that he was not named as an accused in the original Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) dated September 5, 2019, and that investigators had failed to produce fresh material sufficient to justify his arrest. Counsel for the accused also contended that the evidence presented by the agency did not establish grounds for continued incarceration.
After hearing arguments from both sides, the Special PMLA Court concluded that the accused had failed to satisfy the twin conditions for bail prescribed under Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. The court took note of the seriousness of the allegations, the nature of the investigation, and the material placed on record before rejecting the bail application, remanding the political executive back to judicial custody to protect the integrity of ongoing cross-border transaction tracing.
