The Central Bureau of Investigation has registered a fresh fraud case against industrialist Anil Ambani and his company Reliance Communications, alleging that loans worth more than ₹2,220 crore from Bank of Baroda were misused and diverted between 2013 and 2017, prompting coordinated raids at his residence and corporate offices in New Delhi.
CBI action follows bank complaint and High Court decision
The case has been registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation following a formal complaint by Bank of Baroda. According to the agency, the alleged fraud pertains to loan facilities extended to Reliance Communications, widely known as RCOM, during the period from 2013 to 2017. Investigators claim that the funds were not utilized for the purposes for which they were sanctioned, resulting in substantial financial losses to the lending institution.
Soon after registering the first information report, the CBI conducted searches at the residence of Anil Ambani and at multiple office premises linked to Reliance Communications. Officials stated that several important documents related to loan transactions and fund flows were recovered during the raids. These materials are expected to form a key part of the agency’s ongoing investigation into the alleged diversion of funds.
The timing of the action is closely linked to a recent judicial development. The company’s account had been declared a non-performing asset in 2017 after repayment obligations were not met. However, Ambani had challenged the move in the Bombay High Court, which granted a stay on the classification of the account as fraudulent. That stay was lifted on February 23, 2026. Following the lifting of the judicial protection, Bank of Baroda proceeded with its complaint, paving the way for the CBI to formally initiate criminal proceedings.
Investigators allege that Reliance Communications obtained substantial loan amounts from the bank but diverted the funds through a series of transactions involving related companies. The FIR claims that the diversion was carried out under a deliberate and well-planned conspiracy, with the intention of benefiting associated entities rather than fulfilling the stated objectives of the loans. The agency maintains that the bank incurred a loss exceeding ₹2,220 crore due to these actions.
The case unfolds against the backdrop of mounting legal scrutiny around Ambani’s business dealings. On the same day that the CBI conducted searches, Ambani appeared before the Enforcement Directorate in connection with a separate matter reportedly involving alleged financial irregularities of a much larger scale. Although the two cases are distinct, the simultaneous proceedings have intensified public and regulatory focus on the businessman’s financial affairs.
The CBI’s latest case is separate from earlier actions initiated by other lenders. Notably, the State Bank of India had previously registered a complaint against Reliance Communications as part of a consortium of 11 banks. Bank of Baroda was not a member of that consortium, and officials have clarified that the present case concerns separate loans extended independently by Bank of Baroda and certain merged entities, including the then Vijaya Bank and Dena Bank.
By distinguishing this case from the earlier consortium proceedings, investigators have emphasized that the alleged fraud involves different loan facilities and separate financial arrangements. This distinction underscores the complexity of the financial network surrounding Reliance Communications and the multiple creditor relationships involved.
Allegations of fund diversion and complex financial transactions
According to the complaint cited in the FIR, Reliance Communications, along with its subsidiaries Reliance Infratel and Reliance Telecom, collectively raised loans amounting to approximately ₹31,580 crore from various banks and financial institutions. The CBI alleges that significant portions of these funds were not deployed toward legitimate operational or infrastructure objectives but were instead routed through complex financial transactions.
Investigators claim that ₹6,265.85 crore was used to repay loans owed to other banks, while ₹5,501.56 crore was transferred to associated companies. Another ₹3,674.85 crore was reportedly invested in fixed deposits and mutual funds, which were then immediately liquidated and redirected to other parties. The agency asserts that such movements constitute a clear violation of loan conditions, as funds were allegedly channeled away from the purposes specified in the original agreements.
Further scrutiny has been directed at a loan of ₹1,783.65 crore raised by Reliance Infratel. According to the complaint, this amount was allegedly utilized by Reliance Communications to settle its own liabilities or to transfer funds to related entities. The bank contends that such cross-utilization of borrowed money undermined the sanctity of the lending arrangement and contributed directly to the financial loss.
The account in question was officially classified as a non-performing asset on June 5, 2017, after the company failed to service its repayment obligations. Subsequent internal and forensic examinations reportedly indicated that funds had been misappropriated. The FIR alleges that the actions were not accidental or incidental but carried out with deliberate fraudulent intent, resulting in wrongful loss to the bank and unlawful gain to the accused entities.
The CBI has invoked provisions relating to criminal conspiracy, cheating, and misappropriation under relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Prevention of Corruption Act, where applicable. The agency’s investigation will likely focus on tracing fund flows, examining corporate records, and scrutinizing the roles of key executives and financial officers during the period under review.
Legal experts note that the lifting of the High Court’s stay was a crucial turning point. With the protective order no longer in place, the bank’s complaint acquired immediate legal traction, allowing investigative agencies to proceed without judicial restraint. The development illustrates how parallel civil and criminal proceedings can intersect in complex financial disputes.
The broader context of the case also reflects ongoing challenges in India’s banking sector concerning stressed assets and large corporate defaults. Over the past decade, public sector banks have intensified efforts to recover dues from major borrowers and to initiate criminal proceedings in cases where fraud is suspected. The current case adds to that landscape, reinforcing the message that regulatory and investigative scrutiny extends beyond consortium arrangements to individual loan exposures.
As the investigation progresses, attention will likely turn to the documentation seized during the raids and to statements recorded from company officials. Financial experts anticipate that forensic audits and transaction analyses will play a central role in determining whether the alleged diversions were systematic and intentional.
The separate nature of the Bank of Baroda complaint also highlights the fragmented structure of corporate borrowing in large conglomerates, where different subsidiaries may secure funding from different banks under varying terms. This structure can complicate oversight and recovery efforts when financial distress arises.
For now, the CBI’s registration of the fresh ₹2,220 crore fraud case marks another significant chapter in the legal challenges confronting Anil Ambani and his former telecom empire. The agency’s actions signal a renewed investigative push following the judicial green light provided by the lifting of the stay, setting the stage for detailed examination of financial transactions that took place nearly a decade ago.
