Gurugram | The Directorate of Enforcement (ED), Gurugram Zonal Office, has conducted extensive search operations on December 3 and 4, 2025, across Gurugram and Faridabad, targeting Richa Industries Limited (RIL), its promoters Sandeep Gupta, Manish Gupta, Sushil Gupta, and their associated group entities.
The raids, conducted under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002, were part of a probe into an alleged ₹236-crore bank fraud that took place between 2015 and 2018.
Probe Originated from CBI’s FIR in ₹236-Crore Loan Fraud
The ED initiated its money laundering investigation based on a Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) FIR filed under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860, and the Prevention of Corruption Act (PC Act), 1988.
According to the FIR, the accused — including the promoters of Richa Industries — engaged in criminal conspiracy, cheating, and corruption, resulting in wrongful gain to themselves and losses to banks amounting to ₹236 crore.
Promoters Allegedly Manipulated Insolvency Process
ED’s investigation has revealed that the Gupta family and their associates orchestrated a concerted conspiracy to siphon off RIL’s assets and subvert the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP).
To execute this, the promoters allegedly floated a shell company, M/s Saariga Constructions Pvt. Ltd. (SCPL), using a former RIL employee as a benamidar (proxy).
Through this entity, they fraudulently secured voting rights in the Committee of Creditors (CoC), enabling them to influence and obstruct the insolvency proceedings in their favour.
During the insolvency period, they allegedly retained unlawful control over Richa Industries, signed agreements, and even drew personal remuneration, all in violation of insolvency norms and the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC).
Resolution Professional Under Scanner for Collusion
The investigation has also cast serious doubt on the role of Resolution Professional (RP) Arvind Kumar, who, according to the ED, colluded with the promoters by failing to act on findings of fraudulent transactions highlighted in the transaction audit reports.
The RP allegedly did not file mandatory avoidance applications or take corrective measures, despite clear evidence of fund diversion and related-party transactions.
Shell Company Used to Reacquire RIL
ED’s findings suggest that proceeds of crime were routed through Saariga Constructions Pvt. Ltd., which later submitted a Resolution Plan to reacquire Richa Industries, effectively enabling the promoters to regain control through a proxy entity.
The agency described this as a strategic financial manoeuvre, designed to circumvent CIRP restrictions and reclaim ownership of the defaulting company without repaying full liabilities.
False Affidavits in Personal Insolvency Cases
The promoters — Sandeep Gupta, Manish Gupta, and Shweta Gupta — have also come under scrutiny for allegedly submitting fraudulent affidavits in their personal insolvency proceedings.
ED officials said the trio concealed material information and assets to secure immunity from repayment obligations to banks and avoid personal liability under the IBC framework.
ED Seizes Cash, Bank Accounts and Luxury Vehicles
During the searches, the ED seized a trove of incriminating digital and documentary evidence, including:
- records of assets held by the company’s directors,
- fraudulent affidavits and legal documents,
- audited financial statements,
- Tally data of group firms,
- details of shell entities linked to the Gupta family, and
- proof of fund diversion from Richa Industries.
Authorities also froze several bank accounts belonging to the promoters and related individuals, holding aggregate balances exceeding ₹40 lakh.
In addition, ₹8 lakh in cash and four high-end vehicles linked to the Gupta family’s benami and associated companies were seized during the operation.
Evidence Points to Complex Corporate Fraud
The ED believes that the investigation points to a well-coordinated corporate fraud, involving diversion of bank funds, concealment of assets, and misuse of the insolvency process.
Preliminary findings indicate that the promoters used a network of shell companies, collusive professionals, and forged affidavits to mask ownership and retain control of the company during insolvency.
All seized materials — including digital evidence — are being subjected to forensic analysis.
ED Continues Investigation
An ED spokesperson confirmed that the probe is ongoing and that further actions are likely once the forensic audit is complete.
The findings, officials said, highlight how corporate promoters exploit procedural gaps in the insolvency system to delay recovery and reacquire distressed assets through front entities.
The ED’s ongoing investigation aims to trace the complete money trail, identify beneficiaries of the diverted funds, and ensure accountability under PMLA provisions.
