The Supreme Court on Friday said that it will not pass orders to arrest industrialist Anil Ambani in the case of bank fraud by Reliance Communications (RCOM) and its group entities..A Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said that the law laid down by the Supreme Court previously makes it clear that arrest can be ordered only if the investigating agency wants it and it cannot be done to sensationalise the matter."This court has ruled every now and then this court would be very shy to order arrest unless the investigating arm wants. Arrest cannot be ordered to sensationalise it," Justice Bagchi remarked."There are cases where custodial interrogation becomes needed. We have to leave it to the (investigating) agency," CJI Kant weighed in.The Court was hearing a plea filed by former Secretary to the Government of India, EAS Sarma (petitioner), seeking a court-monitored probe into the allegations against Reliance and Ambani..Arrest cannot be ordered to sensationalise case.Supreme Court.According to the petition before the Court, RCOM and its subsidiaries - Reliance Infratel and Reliance Telecom - received loans amounting to ₹31,580 crore between 2013 and 2017 from a consortium of banks led by State Bank of India (SBI).The plea claimed that a forensic audit commissioned by SBI revealed substantial diversion of funds, including thousands of crores used to repay unrelated loans, transfers to related parties, investments in mutual funds and fixed deposits that were immediately liquidated, and complex circular routing of money to disguise evergreening of loans.The petitioner had earlier alleged that the investigating agencies were not investigating the roles of bank officials and regulators despite detailed forensic audits and independent reports pointing to widespread fraud.After the petitioner alleged “institutional complicity", the Supreme Court had in February this year directed the ED to constitute a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to investigate the allegations..When the matter was taken up for hearing today, the CBI and ED handed over their reports in sealed cover..Advocate Prashant Bhushan, appearing for the petitioner, said that the agencies have chargesheeted Anil Ambani and his son Anmol Ambani and as per the chargesheet, it was found that money was siphoned out and a yacht has been bought.He alleged that Anil Ambani is the kingpin behind the scam and yet, the CBI and ED are not willing to arrest him."In this ₹17000 crore scam, Anil Ambani is the kingpin but still neither CBI or ED is not willing to arrest him as if he is some holy cow. They are arresting (other) people, not him." Bhushan said."Investigation is ongoing. If this court thinks that we are not on correct track, then we can come to the right track," Solicitor General Tushar Mehta said."In light of the sealed cover report as of now we are willing to wait," the CJI said.Justice Bagchi too agreed."See Satender Kumar Antil (judgment). If evidences or witnesses are not being tampered, then arrest need not be there. Cart need not be put before the horse. We create Antil and Pankaj Bansal judgments but then chase agencies like bloodhounds? It will run contrary to our judgments. Mr Bhushan you know it," he said..If evidences or witnesses are not being tampered, then arrest need not be there.Supreme Court."Chargesheet says all of this done at the instructions of kingpin and who is this kingpin? Anil Ambani!" Bhushan maintained. "Why should we ex parte express opinion on merits of such arrests?" Justice Bagchi asked. .Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Ambani, asked how Bhushan managed to get a copy of the chargesheet. He alleged that the petitioner's sole agenda is to get Ambani arrested."Cognizance of chargesheet not taken. How does he have a copy ? His only agenda is arrest Anil Ambani. How does he have the chargesheet? There is more than what meets the eye. Why all this?" Sibal asked..Senior Advocate Shyam Divan, appearing for Reliance Infra and Reliance Power, proceeded to highlight the consequences the Court's directions could have. "All project revenues flow into lender-controlled bank and financial institution accounts, and no funds may be withdrawn or transferred without the prior written approval of lenders. The architecture of the cash flows itself is a complete answer to any allegation of diversion. There have been eight provisional attachment orders. As far as Reliance Infra is concerned, one of the provisional attachment orders dated January 28, 2026 concerns strategic regulated utility shareholding valued at approximately ₹1,575.39 crore. The shares attached include 53 crore equity shares of BSES Rajdhani, 28.36 crore equity shares of BSES Yamuna and 37.89 crore equity shares of Mumbai Metro. These are not ornamental holdings. BSES Rajdhani and BSES Yamuna together supply electricity to crores of consumers in the National Capital Territory of Delhi. The attachment and arrests have produced consequences that no economic remedy can later repair. The freezing of working capital headroom and the reputational impact are severe. As far as these listed companies are concerned, there is no specific allegation except with respect to one entity. These are companies with tens of thousands of shareholders. They are blemishless. Merely because they are part of the group, they are also being implicated," Divan said.."We are only hearing you on the issue of jurisdiction. We cannot comment on these exercises," Justice Bagchi replied."I am not inviting the Court to do that. The purpose of putting this across is to indicate the consequences," Divan maintained. "In monitored investigations, collateral damage can sometimes become very severe by the time the investigation culminates in a final report or acquittal. Look at the Jain Hawala monitored investigation. What collateral damage it caused. Vineet Narain judgment evolved the jurisprudence of continuing mandamus. It became a unique judicial tool, perhaps something the Indian judiciary can be proud of. But its consequences have also been devastating. We are fully conscious of that. That is why, to a certain extent, we did not listen to Mr Bhushan about the over-enthusiastic use of a tool which is ultimately a tool of last resort (arrest of Anil Ambani)," Justice Bagchi assured.The Court eventually adjourned the case for July without passing any directions..Sibal and Divan were briefed by advocates Ameet Naik and Abhishek Kale from Naik Naik & Co..[Read Live Coverage]
