₹2,929 Cr SBI Fraud: CBI intensifies probe into Anil Dhirubhai Ambani-linked firms

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has intensified its probe into an alleged ₹2,929.05-crore bank fraud involving Reliance Communications Ltd and industrialist Anil Dhirubhai Ambani , examining key former executives and financial advisors as part of the ongoing investigation.

According to officials, the agency on Saturday questioned former group managing directors of the Reliance ADA Group, Gautam Doshi and Sateesh Seth , at its headquarters. Another former executive, Amitabh Jhunjhunwala , had been examined earlier in the week. The case stems from a complaint filed by State Bank of India, which alleged fraudulent diversion of loan funds.

Investigators allege that loans sanctioned by banks were diverted from their intended purposes, with funds allegedly routed through a complex web of entities and transactions. The FIR claims that Reliance Communications defaulted on dues exceeding ₹40,000 crore to multiple lenders , with SBI alone exposed to losses of nearly ₹2,929 crore as of 2018 . The suspected modus operandi includes misrepresentation of financial health, improper utilisation of sanctioned credit facilities, and siphoning of funds, leading to significant losses for public sector banks.

In a related case, the agency also examined Sanjay Dangi , an advisor to Authum Investment and Infrastructure Ltd, in connection with an alleged ₹57-crore fraud involving Reliance Commercial Finance Ltd and Bank of Maharashtra. Officials said total losses linked to Reliance Commercial Finance and Reliance Home Finance could exceed ₹9,000 crore.

The CBI registered the case in August 2025 and has since questioned several senior officials, including Ambani, who has been named as an accused. The investigation is ongoing, with scrutiny focused on financial transactions, corporate decision-making, and accountability of key individuals.

Ambani has denied wrongdoing, stating he had no role in day-to-day operations during the period in question. The matter remains sub judice before the National Company Law Tribunal and other courts, including the Supreme Court.