Industrialist Anil Ambani has assured the Supreme Court of India he will not leave the country without prior approval as investigations continue into alleged large-scale banking fraud involving Reliance Communications Ltd (RCOM) and its group companies, according to a compliance affidavit filed with the court.
The assurance, formalized in the affidavit, stems from an earlier statement made on February 4th by Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, representing Ambani, that his client would seek the court’s permission before any international travel. Ambani has remained in India since July 2025, coinciding with the commencement of the current investigations, and currently has no plans to travel abroad, the affidavit states.
The court’s scrutiny follows a public interest litigation (PIL) filed by former Secretary to the Government of India, EAS Sarma, seeking a court-monitored investigation into the alleged fraud. Sarma’s petition alleges systemic diversion of funds, fabrication of accounts, and institutional complicity in the financial dealings of RCOM and its subsidiaries.
According to the petition, RCOM, along with Reliance Infratel and Reliance Telecom, received loans totaling ₹31,580 crore between 2013 and 2017 from a consortium of banks led by the State Bank of India (SBI). A forensic audit commissioned by SBI reportedly revealed substantial diversion of funds, including the use of loan proceeds to repay unrelated debts, transfers to related parties, investments in mutual funds and fixed deposits that were quickly liquidated, and complex financial transactions designed to conceal the evergreening of loans.
The affidavit as well details Ambani’s ongoing cooperation with the Enforcement Directorate (ED), stating he has been summoned and has agreed to appear as required. His statement under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, is currently being recorded. Ambani clarified in the affidavit that his role within the concerned companies was limited to that of a non-executive director, with no involvement in daily operations or management decisions.
Sarma’s petition contends that the First Information Report (FIR) registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) on August 21, 2025, and subsequent ED proceedings, address only a fraction of the alleged wrongdoing. The petition further alleges that the roles of bank officials and regulators have not been adequately investigated, despite findings from forensic audits and independent reports pointing to widespread irregularities.
On February 4th, the Supreme Court directed the ED to establish a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to examine the allegations raised in Sarma’s petition. The court also instructed the CBI to investigate potential collusion by bank officials in the alleged fraud. The court is currently awaiting status reports from both the CBI and ED regarding their investigations.