New Delhi | The Supreme Court on Tuesday granted bail to former Amtek Group chairman Arvind Dham in the alleged ₹2,700-crore bank fraud case — overturning a Delhi High Court order that had earlier refused him regular bail. The apex court has left it to the concerned trial court to decide the specific terms and conditions.
How the ED probe began
The case stems from transactions linked to Amtek Group company ACIL Ltd.
In July, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) arrested Dham under provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, following FIRs registered by the CBI based on complaints from IDBI Bank and Bank of Maharashtra.3
Final Call: FCRF Opens Last Registration Window for GRC and DPO Certifications
According to the complaints, multiple loans sanctioned to group companies were:
- allegedly obtained through fraud and criminal breach of trust,
- diverted through various channels, and
- resulted in “significant financial loss” to banks.
Defaults mounting beyond ₹2,700 crore
Investigators say dues of Amtek Group and its companies —
ARG Ltd, ACIL, Amtek Auto, Metalyst Forging, Castex Technologies — kept piling up with over 15 banks, eventually pushing several entities into the insolvency process.
The ED has claimed that:
- total defaults crossed ₹2,700 crore,
- loan proceeds were used for “non-permissible purposes”, and
- funds were layered and transferred through complex transactions.
Allegations of benami ownership
In court, the agency argued that Dham was found to be the beneficial owner of several benami companies and assets. These entities were allegedly held in the names of individuals who:
- worked in junior roles within the Amtek ecosystem — drivers, field staff, support staff, or
- had no direct connection with the group, yet appeared as company directors.
According to the ED, the true ownership of these assets was never disclosed to creditors.
Supreme Court’s view — what happens next
While granting bail, the Supreme Court observed that:
- continuous pre-trial incarceration is not always necessary,
- the trial court will determine the bail conditions, and
- investigation and trial will continue simultaneously.
The court clarified that bail should not be construed as a “clean chit”; the case will proceed strictly on merits.
Why the case matters
The proceedings raise wider concerns around banking oversight, corporate governance and recovery frameworks:
- how banks track use-of-funds in large corporate loans,
- how effectively agencies detect benami structures and layering, and
- how insolvency processes can resolve such cases faster and more transparently.
In the next stage, the trial court will:
- set bail conditions,
- decide on travel and reporting restrictions, and
- align timelines for evidence and hearings with investigating agencies.
Both the ED and the defence are expected to press their arguments as the trial progresses.
About the author — Suvedita Nath is a science student with a growing interest in cybercrime and digital safety. She writes on online activity, cyber threats, and technology-driven risks. Her work focuses on clarity, accuracy, and public awareness.
