A special CBI court in Mumbai has granted bail to former Cox & Kings director Ajay Kerkar, alongside executives Urshila Kerkar and Vanaja Rajan, in a ₹946.44 crore loan fraud case linked to Yes Bank. The court cited lack of CBI justification for their continued custody, even as allegations surfaced of forgery, fund diversion, and corporate misuse of credit facilities.
Bail Granted Amid Scrutiny Over Corporate Malfeasance
In the ongoing Yes Bank fraud probe, a Mumbai special CBI court on May 7 granted bail to three key figures from the Cox & Kings group Ajay Kerkar, Urshila Kerkar, and Vanaja Rajan. The trio was accused of participating in a ₹946.44 crore fraud involving loans sanctioned to Ezeego One Travels and Tours Ltd (EOTTL), a group entity under Cox & Kings.
The court, presided over by Special CBI Judge S.H. Gwalani, emphasized that the Central Bureau of Investigation had not arrested the accused during the probe nor presented compelling evidence to support their continued judicial custody post-charge sheet. Notably, this bail order follows similar relief granted earlier to ex-Yes Bank CEO Rana Kapoor and five others connected to the case.
Forgery, Diversion, and False Documentation: Inside the Alleged Conspiracy
According to the CBI, the fraud traces back to a 2020 complaint by Ashish Joshi, the then Chief Vigilance Officer at Yes Bank. Joshi alleged that loans totalling ₹1,015 crore were sanctioned to EOTTL between 2017 and 2018, even though the company was in poor financial health. Initially approved for ₹650 crore, the facility was later expanded, with Yes Bank allegedly ignoring red flags about EOTTL’s creditworthiness.
The sanctioned funds were allegedly diverted to settle debts of the parent company, Cox & Kings, in clear violation of the loan’s stated purpose. Investigators say that EOTTL submitted inflated and forged balance sheets and end-use certificates to secure and justify the disbursement of funds. The CBI further alleges that the accused deliberately engaged in this financial manipulation as part of a larger criminal conspiracy.
A forensic audit commissioned by the bank later uncovered significant financial irregularities, prompting Yes Bank to classify the account as fraudulent in February 2020.
Defence Contends Innocence, No Risk of Absconding
The defence team for the accused argued strongly against their continued incarceration, stating that the individuals had cooperated fully with investigators and posed no flight risk. The court agreed with this reasoning, observing that the prosecution had not expressed any apprehension that granting bail would hamper the judicial process or affect the trial.
Importantly, the court acknowledged that the accused were never arrested during the investigation, weakening the rationale for post-charge-sheet custody. “Applicant/accused was not arrested by the CBI during the course of investigation till filing of charge sheet,” Judge Gwalani noted.