Chandigarh: A special CBI court has rejected the first regular bail application of Ribhav Rishi, former branch manager of IDFC First Bank’s Sector 32 Chandigarh branch, in a case involving an alleged financial fraud of around ₹550 crore linked to Haryana government departments. The court observed that the case involved a large-scale economic offence and that the investigating agency had, prima facie, pointed to Rishi’s alleged active role in the conspiracy.
Special CBI Judge Vijayant Sehgal dismissed the bail plea on August 21, observing that while a detailed assessment of evidence was not required at the bail stage, the material collected during the investigation could not be ignored. The court also considered the alleged misuse of substantial public funds while refusing to grant relief to the accused.
Discrepancies Found in Government Accounts and FDRs
The case emerged after alleged discrepancies were detected in funds and fixed deposit receipts (FDRs) maintained by various Haryana government departments with IDFC First Bank and AU Small Finance Bank. The issue came to light after a three-member inquiry committee examined discrepancies in the accounts of the Director, Development and Panchayats Department.
An initial case was subsequently registered against bank officials and unidentified persons. The first FIR was registered by the Anti-Corruption Bureau on February 23, 2026, while the Central Bureau of Investigation took over the investigation on April 8. Further investigation allegedly revealed similar discrepancies in the accounts of other Haryana government departments.
Alleged Network Involving Bank Officials and Others
According to the CBI, government funds were allegedly withdrawn through fraudulent means and transferred to shell entities through a network involving bank officials, private individuals and some government officials.
The agency has accused Rishi of allegedly misusing his position as branch manager to execute the scheme and described him as the alleged “principal architect and mastermind” of the conspiracy.
The CBI alleged that Rishi opened certain Haryana government accounts at the Sector 32 branch of IDFC First Bank without mandatory approvals. Forged debit notes, cheques and other documents were allegedly used to transfer funds from government accounts.
₹187.3 Crore Allegedly Diverted Through 25 Transactions
The CBI alleged that fraudulent documents and banking procedures were used to withdraw money from government accounts. According to the investigation, Rishi authorised at least 25 allegedly fraudulent debit transactions across multiple government accounts, involving approximately ₹187.3 crore.
The agency further alleged that fake FDRs and fabricated account statements were prepared and provided to government departments to create the impression that their funds were safely maintained with the bank. The actual funds were allegedly transferred to other entities.
Shell Companies Allegedly Used to Move Funds
According to the CBI, shell companies including SRR Planning Gurus were allegedly used to receive and layer the proceeds of the alleged fraud through multiple transactions.
The agency also claimed that substantial amounts were transferred to the personal bank accounts of Rishi and his wife from entities allegedly linked to the fraud.
Opposing the bail plea, the CBI argued that Rishi’s release could allow him to influence witnesses, tamper with evidence and hamper the ongoing investigation. The agency cited electronic evidence, WhatsApp conversations, call detail records and emails in support of its allegations.
Defence Challenges Investigation
Rishi’s counsel opposed the allegations and argued that the investigation had been conducted in haste and that the accused was not responsible for the alleged fraud.
The defence also argued that the evidence in the case was primarily documentary and electronic in nature and therefore could not easily be tampered with. The counsel further submitted that the trial was likely to take considerable time and that continued custody of the accused was not justified.
Court Cites Gravity of Alleged Economic Offence
The court observed that a detailed evaluation of evidence is not required while deciding a bail application. However, it said the material placed before it by the prosecution could not be completely disregarded at this stage.
The court noted that, if proved, the allegations involved the alleged siphoning of substantial public funds. The gravity of the alleged offence therefore weighed against granting bail to Rishi.
Rishi was arrested on February 24, 2026. The court also recorded that the investigation against him and other accused persons had progressed considerably and that final reports had been filed, although further investigation into certain aspects was continuing.
The special CBI court ultimately dismissed the bail application. It clarified that the observations made while deciding the bail plea were limited to the present proceedings and would not influence the final outcome of the main trial.
