The Supreme Court on Friday refused to order the arrest of industrialist Anil Ambani in a high-stakes bank fraud case involving Reliance Communications (RCOM), making it clear that arrests cannot be ordered to “sensationalise” proceedings and must be left to the discretion of investigating agencies.
A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said the court would be “very shy” to direct arrests unless specifically sought by probe agencies such as the CBI or Enforcement Directorate (ED). “Arrest cannot be ordered to sensationalise the matter,” Justice Bagchi observed, underlining that custodial interrogation should be determined by investigators based on necessity.
The court was hearing a petition filed by former bureaucrat EAS Sarma seeking a court-monitored investigation into alleged financial irregularities involving RCOM and its group companies. The plea cited loans worth Rs. 31,580 crore extended between 2013 and 2017 by a consortium of banks led by the State Bank of India, and flagged findings from a forensic audit that pointed to large-scale diversion of funds.
According to the petition, the audit uncovered transactions involving repayment of unrelated loans, transfers to connected entities, investments in financial instruments that were quickly liquidated, and complex routing of funds allegedly aimed at masking the evergreening of debt.
Appearing for the petitioner, advocate Prashant Bhushan argued that investigative agencies had already filed chargesheets naming Anil Ambani and his son Anmol Ambani, and claimed the probe had revealed siphoning of funds, including purchases of luxury assets. He alleged that despite Ambani being the “kingpin” of a Rs. 17,000 crore scam, agencies had failed to take coercive action against him. “Others are being arrested, but not him,” Bhushan told the court.
Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing Ambani, countered by questioning how the petitioner had accessed the chargesheet when cognisance had not yet been taken by a trial court. He accused the petitioner of pursuing the case with the sole aim of securing Ambani’s arrest. “There is more than what meets the eye. Why all this?” Sibal asked.
The court, however, refrained from entering into the merits of the allegations at this stage, reiterating that arrest decisions must rest with the investigating agencies and not be driven by public or legal pressure.
It eventually adjourned the matter to July without passing any directions.