Delhi High Court grants bail to ex-Reliance executive Amitabh Jhunjhunwala in ED case

The Delhi High Court on Tuesday granted bail to former Reliance Anil Dhirubhai Ambani Group senior executive Amitabh Jhunjhunwala in a money laundering case being probed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) [Amitabh Jhunjhunwala v Directorate of Enforcement]. .Justice Madhu Jain observed that his medical condition brought him within the “sick or infirm” exception under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA)."The medical record, when considered cumulatively, discloses a condition which materially affects the petitioner’s physical functioning and requires structured and continuing medical care. The Court is therefore of the view that the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of the statutory exception," the Court observed. .The Court was hearing Jhunjhunwala's bail plea in an Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) registered on the basis of two CBI FIRs concerning alleged diversion of funds involving Reliance Commercial Finance Ltd (RCFL) and Reliance Home Finance Ltd (RHFL). The ED has alleged that ₹15,933.65 crore was disbursed to shell and group entities and subsequently diverted and layered through various entities.Jhunjhunwala was arrested in the ED case on April 15, 2026 and has remained in custody since then. He sought bail primarily on medical grounds, citing a D-11 vertebral compression fracture, spinal complications, osteoporosis, neurological symptoms and a history of coronary artery disease.The ED opposed bail, arguing that he was receiving continuous medical care in custody and that government medical boards had recommended conservative treatment without surgery or prolonged hospitalisation..However, the High Court said the medical record had to be considered cumulatively rather than by examining individual ailments in isolation. It reasoned that the proviso to Section 45(1) uses the expressions “sick” and “infirm” in the alternative. "The provision does not qualify either expression by the words “terminal”, “irreversible”, “imminently life-threatening” or “requiring surgery”. The discretion conferred by the proviso is undoubtedly required to be exercised judiciously; however, while considering such an application, a Court cannot read into the statutory provision a condition which is not contained therein," Justice Madhu Jain observed. .Senior Advocates Mahesh Jethmalani and Rebecca John with advocates Sowjhanya Shankaran, Apoorv Agarwal, Ravi Sharma, Gaurav Sarkar, Sanchit Agarwal, Abhishek Jaiswal, Mudit Jain, Siddharth Satija, Sriharsh Raj, Akash Sachan, Aayush Goswami and Raghav Gupta represented Amitabh Jhunjhunwala. .ED was represented by Senior Advocate Zoheb Hossain, Panel Counsel Vivek Gurnani as well as advocates Vivek Gurnani, Pranjal Tripathi, Kanishk Maurya, Prakhar Bharadwaj and Siddharth Bajaj..[Read Order]