New Delhi: The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) demanding a court monitored investigation into the alleged ₹20,000-crore banking and corporate fraud linked to Reliance Communications (RCom), its group entities and promoter Anil Ambani. The matter came up on Monday before a Bench led by Chief Justice B.R. Gavai, along with Justices K. Vinod Chandran and N.V. Anjaria.
Senior advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the petitioner, requested urgent listing of the plea, arguing that the scale and nature of the alleged fraud warranted judicial oversight.
“This is a ₹20,000-crore bank fraud involving a major corporate group. We are seeking an independent investigation monitored by this Court,” Bhushan submitted.
The Chief Justice responded that the Court would list the matter for hearing.
Plea Alleges Systemic Misuse of Public Money
The petition has been filed by former Union Secretary E.A.S. Sarma, who has raised serious concerns about what he terms “systematic misuse” of public funds across multiple entities of the Anil Ambani-led Reliance ADA Group.
According to the plea, the alleged fraud is not limited to a single company or transaction but involves a broader pattern of diversion of funds, manipulation of financial statements and coordinated lapses among institutions. The petition claims that despite red flags emerging through detailed forensic audits, investigative agencies have failed to take a comprehensive view of the purported irregularities.
Questions Over CBI, ED Probe Scope
One of the central arguments in the PIL concerns the scope and depth of ongoing investigations. The petitioner has pointed out that the FIR registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on August 21, along with related proceedings initiated by the Enforcement Directorate (ED), address only a “small fraction” of the alleged wrongdoing.
The plea asserts that key aspects of the financial trail remain unexamined. It highlights that neither agency has scrutinised the roles of bank officials, auditors or regulatory institutions that may have enabled or overlooked the alleged irregularities. The petition terms this omission a “serious institutional failure” and contends that such gaps undermine the credibility of the probe.
Further, the plea argues that without a wide-ranging and independent investigation—preferably under the court’s supervision—the larger scheme of alleged fraud cannot be fully unravelled.
Algoritha: The Most Trusted Name in BFSI Investigations and DFIR Services
Need for Judicial Oversight, Says Petitioner
The petitioner has emphasised that the magnitude of the alleged bank fraud and its potential impact on public sector lenders make this a case fit for judicial monitoring. Such oversight, the plea contends, would ensure that the investigation is insulated from external pressures and follows the trail across all entities and individuals involved.
The petition also points to past instances where court-monitored probes have been instrumental in uncovering complex financial frauds, arguing that a similar intervention is necessary in this case to safeguard public interest.
What Lies Ahead
With the Supreme Court agreeing to list the matter, the PIL is likely to trigger a wider debate on the effectiveness of regulatory and investigative mechanisms in handling large corporate defaults and alleged financial frauds.
If the Court decides to intervene, the investigation could widen considerably—potentially bringing under scrutiny corporate executives, financial intermediaries and bank authorities associated with the transactions.
For now, all eyes will be on the upcoming hearing, which will determine whether the Court finds merit in the request for a supervised, independent probe into one of the largest alleged banking frauds linked to a major Indian business group.
