Supreme Court Refuses Bail To Former Reliance Power CFO Ashok Pal In ₹68.20 Crore PMLA Case

The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to grant bail to former Reliance Power Chief Financial Officer Ashok Pal in a ₹68.20 crore money laundering case. The case arises from the alleged submission of forged bank guarantees for a Solar Energy Corporation of India (SECI) battery energy storage project.

A bench of Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice R. Mahadevan, however, granted Pal liberty to seek regular bail after charges are framed by the trial court.

The Delhi High Court had earlier declined to grant Pal bail on June 10, 2026.

While refusing relief at this stage, the Supreme Court observed, "No doubt the investigation is complete... but at this stage, we are not inclined. Let the charges be framed, we'll see."

Appearing for the Directorate of Enforcement (ED), Solicitor General Tushar Mehta submitted that a public interest litigation concerning the broader Reliance Power investigation was pending before the Chief Justice. He requested that Pal's case also be placed before the same Bench.

Referring to the allegations, Mehta submitted that forged bank guarantees were furnished in connection with a Reliance Power project. According to the ED, this caused a loss of ₹105.98 crore to the public exchequer. He informed the court that three company officials, including Pal, had been arrested. He also said that the prosecution complaint had already been filed.

Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for Pal, opposed the request. He argued that the present matter was a regular bail plea and should be heard independently. Rohatgi submitted that the investigation had been completed and the prosecution complaint had already been filed. He also pointed out that Pal had spent nearly ten months in custody. Rohatgi further contended that Pal had not forged the bank guarantees himself. He added that, if necessary, the company could secure the amount allegedly involved.

The bench was not persuaded to grant bail at this stage.

Disposing of the petition, the court ruled, "The petitioner would be at liberty to seek the relief of regular bail once the charges have been framed in the instant case by making an application before the trial court. It is needless to observe that if such an application is made by the petitioner, the same shall be considered on its own merits as expeditiously as possible."

Background

The case arises from an SECI tender issued on June 26, 2024 for a 1000 MW/2000 MWh Battery Energy Storage System project for which bidders were required to furnish a ₹68.20 crore bank guarantee. Reliance Power entered into a cooperation agreement with Biswal Tradelink Pvt Ltd on July 29, 2024 followed by a supplementary agreement on August 2, 2024. According to the prosecution, forged bank guarantees purportedly issued by ACE Investment Bank, Malaysia and later FirstRand Bank, Philippines along with a forged State Bank of India endorsement, were submitted to SECI.

The ED registered an ECIR on June 16, 2025 and arrested Pal on October 10, 2025. The agency relied on agreements executed by Pal, statements recorded under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, WhatsApp messages, emails and other electronic evidence to allege his involvement in the generation and submission of the forged guarantees.

Rejecting Pal's bail plea, the High Court held that the material collected during investigation disclosed a prima facie case and that the twin conditions under Section 45 of the PMLA were not satisfied.

The Court observed, "Having regard to the nature of the allegations and the material relied upon by the Directorate of Enforcement, this Court is unable to record satisfaction that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the Applicant is not guilty of the offence alleged."