Delhi High Court Grants Bail To Former RCOM Executive In Alleged ₹149.77 Crore Money Laundering Case

The Delhi High Court on Thursday granted regular bail to former Reliance Communications (RCOM) executive Punit Narendra Garg in a money laundering case involving alleged diversion of loan funds used to acquire a yacht and an overseas apartment.

The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has alleged that transactions involving these assets and payments towards his daughters' educational expenses generated proceeds of crime worth approximately ₹149.77 crore.

Justice Sanjeev Narula held that Garg's prolonged incarceration, the substantial expansion of the prosecution and the remote prospect of an early conclusion of trial weighed against his continued detention.

"On the material presently available, and for the reasons discussed, the Court is satisfied that both conditions under Section 45 stand fulfilled. The period of incarceration, the substantial enlargement of the prosecution and the remote prospect of an early conclusion of trial provide additional reasons why continued detention is not warranted."

Garg was arrested on January 29, 2026 in an ED money laundering case arising from a CBI FIR based on an SBI complaint against Reliance Communications (RCOM), Anil Ambani and others, alleging loan fund diversion causing a loss of ₹2,929.05 crore to SBI.

The ED alleged that RCOM linked funds were used to acquire a yacht in 2008 and a Manhattan apartment in 2010, with subsequent loans obtained between 2013 and 2017 used to refinance earlier borrowings. It alleged Garg later participated in the sale of both assets and payments towards his daughters' educational expenses, quantifying the alleged proceeds of crime at ₹149.77 crore.

Garg argued that the assets predated the alleged scheduled offences and refinancing alone could not make them proceeds of crime. The Rouse Avenue Special Court rejected his bail plea on June 15, 2026.

On the issue of whether the assets constituted proceeds of crime, the Court observed that the scheduled offence and subsequent money laundering need not occur simultaneously.

Since the yacht and apartment predated the alleged offences, the Court held that refinancing earlier borrowings through subsequent loans did not by itself, establish the requisite connection.

The Court rejected the ED's argument that the subsequent financial transactions, by themselves, established that the assets had become proceeds of crime.

It held that the repayment trail relied upon by the ED required examination but the connection between the assets acquired in 2008 and 2010 and the alleged offences of 2013-2017 remained a substantial disputed question.

The Court also considered the expanded prosecution, which comprised approximately 77,384 pages of documents and 56 witnesses in the consolidated proceedings. The predicate prosecution involved over 100 witnesses, while scrutiny and supply of documents remained pending and further investigation was ongoing.

With no realistic prospect of an early conclusion of trial, continued detention was not warranted.

Accordingly the Court granted bail and directed Garg to furnish a personal bond of ₹1 lakh with two sureties of the like amount.

He must surrender his passport, obtain permission before leaving India, attend court hearings, cooperate with further investigation, refrain from contacting or influencing witnesses, and not deal with the assets or their sale proceeds without the Special Court's permission.

For Petitioner: Arvind Nigam and Pavan Narang, Senior Advocates with VP Singh, Priyank Ladoia, Arjun Narang, Kushagra Jain, Puneet Dhanoa and Jitesh Lakra, Advocates

For Respondent: Zoheb Hossain, Senior Advocate with Vivek Gurnani, Panel Counsel with Pranjal Tripathi and Shyam Bhageria, Advocates with Kota Shastri, I.O