Supreme Court Grants Bail To Sahara Group Functionary In ₹76 Crore Money Laundering Case
The Supreme Court on Friday granted bail to Anil Vailaparampil Abraham, a former senior functionary of the Sahara Group, in a money laundering case linked to the alleged diversion of ₹76.29 crore in connection with the sale of Sahara Prime City property in Berhampur, Odisha.
The Calcutta High Court on July 24, 2026 dismissed the bail plea, holding that Abraham failed to satisfy the twin conditions under Section 45 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. It observed that the petitioner's age and period of detention could not outweigh the collective economic interests of thousands of investors allegedly defrauded in the case.
A Division Bench of Justices M.M. Sundresh and P.B. Varale took into account his prolonged incarceration and the stage of the investigation and trial and set aside the Calcutta High Court's order that refused to grant bail.
“Suffice it is to say that the continued incarceration of the appellant is not required. In such view of the matter, we are inclined to set aside the order. The trial court is directed to frame charges within a period of 4 months."
Appearing for Abraham, Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi argued that his client had been in custody since July 2025, had not been examined even once during the investigation, and was the only accused among around 20 accused persons who remained incarcerated. He submitted that the investigation was substantially complete, supplementary complaints had been filed, and the trial was still at a preliminary stage.
Rohatgi also pointed out that the voluminous documentary record ran into approximately 12,000 pages and referred to the bail granted to a co-accused, whose bail cancellation was pending before the Supreme Court.
Additional Solicitor General S.V. Raju, appearing for the Enforcement Directorate (ED), opposed the plea by highlighting the allegations concerning the sale of Sahara properties despite orders of the Supreme Court.
He argued that the alleged transactions involved the sale of property below the circle rate and the handling of substantial amounts of cash. The Bench also discussed the status of the alleged proceeds and the fact that the broader Sahara-related proceedings had remained pending for several years.
During the hearing, the Bench considered whether continued incarceration was necessary when the investigation had substantially concluded and the trial had yet to progress. The ED indicated that it was not opposing bail outright, but sought a direction for the trial court to frame charges within a fixed period.
The Court granted bail, taking into account Abraham's incarceration of more than a year and the stage of the proceedings. It directed the trial court to frame charges within a period of 4 months
The case arose from a regular bail plea filed by Anil Vailaparampil Abraham in a money laundering case arising from the Sahara Group linked Humara India Credit Cooperative Society Ltd. Ponzi scheme. The ED alleged that the scheme involved unauthorised collection of public deposits from thousands of investors and diversion of funds through complex transactions.
The ED alleged that Abraham who held a senior position in the Sahara Group's Chairman's Core Management Team, facilitated irregular sale of a 32 acre Sahara Prime City property in Berhampur, Odisha, involving undervaluation and unaccounted cash of ₹76.29 crore.
For the Petitioner: Senior Advocates Mukul Rohatgi, Dama Seshadri Naidu, Advocates Arshdeep Singh Khurana, Aditya Chopra, AOR Naman Tandon, Annada Dubey