Two weeks after the Supreme Court pulled up central agencies over delay in the probe into the alleged massive banking scam involving Reliance Communications and group entities, former promoter Anil Ambani on Thursday gave a written undertaking not to leave the country without obtaining prior court permission and asserted that he was not involved in the day-to-day affairs of the companies under investigation.
In his affidavit submitted before a bench headed by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Ambani stated that his role in the companies concerned was “that of a non-executive director only” and that he “did not participate in the day-to-day management or operational affairs of the said companies”.
The affidavit comes in the wake of the court’s February 4 order in which it expressed concern over the pace of investigation being conducted by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) and Enforcement Directorate (ED) into allegations of misappropriation of public funds on a large scale. At that time, the court had directed the Center and agencies to take all preventive steps to ensure that Ambani does not leave the country, even after his counsel, senior advocate Mukul Rohatgi, assured that he would not travel abroad without prior leave.
Ambani formally reiterated this assertion under oath, saying he had not left India since July 2025, when the current investigations began, and had no intention of traveling abroad. “Should any requirement for foreign travel arise, I will seek prior permission and permission of this honorable court before undertaking any such travel,” he vowed.
He stated that he was summoned by the Emergency Directorate on February 26 and would attend and join the investigation on the aforementioned date. Stating that he is “fully cooperating with the investigating agencies”, Ambani said he continues to extend full cooperation and that there is no question of evading the legal process.
“Any cooperation offered or provision of material shall be appropriately understood in the context of the matters actually in hand, and shall not subsequently be considered in isolation therefrom,” the affidavit added, referring to the ongoing scrutiny under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002.
He maintained that given his conduct and undertakings, it was clear that he was not a flight risk and had “no intention whatsoever to evade legal proceedings”. He added that the affidavit was submitted “to ensure clarity, completeness and procedural transparency in the judicial record.”
On February 4, the Supreme Court came down hard on the CBI and its executive department over what it called “unjustified delay” in investigating allegations of fraud running into tens of thousands of crores of rupees involving public sector banks and financial institutions. The court stressed that the scale and nature of the alleged crimes warranted a more rigorous and comprehensive investigation, including multiple preliminary investigations and run-of-the-mill cases rather than a single FIR.
The bench noted that procedural objections, such as the requirement to impose a penalty, cannot be allowed to derail the investigation when there is material indicating misappropriation of funds and possible collusion. It also directed the agencies to act “fairly, expeditiously and without any fear or favour,” and to take all preventive measures to ensure that the investigation is not thwarted.
These proceedings arose out of a public interest litigation filed by retired bureaucrat EAS Sarma, argued by advocates Prashant Bhushan and Pranav Sachdeva, seeking a court-monitored investigation into the alleged fraud involving various entities of the Reliance Group.
In an earlier affidavit before the court, the CEO revealed widespread defaults by multiple entities. It stated that Reliance Home Finance Ltd was unable to repay the loans $7,523.46 crore from 33 lenders, while Reliance Commercial Finance Ltd defaulted on loans worth $8,226.05 crore from 21 lenders. In the case of Reliance Communications (RCOM) and its group companies, the outstanding receivables amount to more than $An amount of Rs 40,000 crore has been cited as forming part of the alleged proceeds of crime.
The ED has registered three Enforcement Information Reports (ECIRs) so far in relation to the matter and has made arrests. The CBI has been directed to examine institutional collusion and take the investigation to its logical conclusion.
The Supreme Court made it clear that it would continue to closely monitor the investigation. The matter is expected to be listed again on March 10 after the agencies submit detailed situation reports, with the court stressing that nothing should be allowed to hamper the investigation.
