Delhi court takes cognisance of ED charge sheet against ex-RCom Director Punit Garg in ₹40,000 crore fraud case
Synopsis
A Delhi court has formally taken cognisance of the ED's charge sheet against former RCom Director Punit Garg in an alleged ₹40,000 crore bank fraud-linked money laundering case — with allegations spanning offshore fund diversion, a $8.3 million Manhattan condo sale, and siphoning of proceeds to a Dubai entity, all reportedly bypassing insolvency oversight.
Key Takeaways
The Rouse Avenue Court, Delhi took cognisance of the ED's prosecution complaint against ex- RCom Director Punit Narendra Garg on 15 June .
The alleged bank fraud-linked money laundering case is valued at ₹40,000 crore .
The court dismissed Garg's bail plea; next hearing is on 4 July .
Garg was arrested on 29 January under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) .
The ED alleges diversion of funds through foreign subsidiaries, personal use of proceeds, and fraudulent sale of an $8.3 million Manhattan condominium with proceeds routed to a Dubai -based entity.
The alleged remittance reportedly bypassed the Resolution Professional overseeing RCom's insolvency process.
A Delhi court on Monday, 15 June took cognisance of the prosecution complaint filed by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) against former Reliance Communications (RCom) Director Punit Narendra Garg and other accused in an alleged ₹40,000 crore bank fraud-linked money laundering case. The Rouse Avenue Court has listed the matter for further hearing on 4 July.
Court Dismisses Bail Plea
Alongside taking cognisance of the charge sheet filed by the federal anti-money laundering agency, the court dismissed Garg's bail application. A detailed order is awaited and is expected to be uploaded on the court's official website.
This follows an earlier rejection of his plea for interim bail on medical grounds. Garg had sought temporary release to undergo examination and treatment at a private hospital, with his counsel submitting that he had previously been receiving care at Mumbai's Kokilaben Dhirubhai Ambani Hospital and had been advised intensive medical tests, including capsule endoscopy.
Background: Arrest and PMLA Provisions
Garg was arrested by the ED on 29 January under the provisions of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) in connection with the case. According to the ED, Garg played an active role in the acquisition, possession, concealment, layering, and dissipation of alleged proceeds of crime generated through the purported bank fraud.
The agency has alleged that while holding senior managerial and directorial positions in Reliance Communications over several years, Garg was involved in the diversion of funds through multiple foreign subsidiaries and offshore entities linked to the company.
Key Allegations: Offshore Diversion and Manhattan Property
The ED has further alleged that proceeds of crime were diverted to offshore entities and utilised for personal expenses, including financing the overseas education of his children. The agency has also claimed that an $8.3 million luxury condominium in Manhattan, New York, was fraudulently sold and the sale proceeds siphoned to a Dubai-based entity.
According to the ED, the remittance was executed through a sham investment arrangement, reportedly without the knowledge or consent of the Resolution Professional overseeing RCom's corporate insolvency resolution process. This alleged bypassing of insolvency oversight represents a significant dimension of the case.
What Happens Next
With cognisance now taken, the case moves toward formal trial proceedings. The next date of hearing is set for 4 July, when the court is expected to address further procedural steps. The matter is part of a broader scrutiny of the financial collapse of Reliance Communications, once one of India's largest telecom operators, which has been under insolvency proceedings for several years. The outcome of this case could have significant implications for how Indian courts and enforcement agencies pursue money laundering charges linked to corporate insolvencies.
Point of View
But the more consequential detail is the ED's allegation that insolvency oversight was actively circumvented — a pattern that, if proven, would expose a critical vulnerability in India's corporate resolution framework. RCom's collapse wiped out billions in creditor value, and the allegation that proceeds were simultaneously being routed to offshore personal accounts and a Manhattan luxury property would represent one of the more brazen examples of alleged parallel asset stripping during insolvency. Courts have historically moved slowly on PMLA cases of this complexity; the real test will be whether the trial phase delivers convictions or stalls in procedural delays, as similar high-profile financial crime cases have done in the past.
NationPress
5 Aug 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the ED case against Punit Garg?
The Enforcement Directorate has filed a prosecution complaint against Punit Narendra Garg, former Director of Reliance Communications, alleging his role in a money laundering case linked to an alleged ₹40,000 crore bank fraud. The ED claims he was involved in diverting funds through foreign subsidiaries and offshore entities during his tenure at RCom.
What did the Delhi court decide on 15 June?
The Rouse Avenue Court in Delhi took cognisance of the ED's charge sheet against Garg and other accused on 15 June, and also dismissed his bail plea. The matter has been listed for the next hearing on 4 July.
Why was Punit Garg's bail plea rejected?
Garg's bail plea was dismissed by the court on 15 June, following an earlier rejection of his interim bail application on medical grounds. He had sought temporary release for treatment at a private hospital, citing ongoing care at Mumbai's Kokilaben Dhirubhai Ambani Hospital, but the court did not grant relief.
What are the key allegations against Punit Garg?
The ED alleges that Garg was involved in acquisition, concealment, and layering of proceeds of crime from the alleged bank fraud. Specific allegations include diverting funds through foreign subsidiaries, using proceeds for personal expenses including children's overseas education, and fraudulently selling an $8.3 million Manhattan condominium with proceeds routed to a Dubai-based entity.
How does this case connect to RCom's insolvency?
Reliance Communications has been undergoing a corporate insolvency resolution process. The ED alleges that the remittance related to the Manhattan property sale was made through a sham investment arrangement without the knowledge or consent of the Resolution Professional overseeing that insolvency process, adding a layer of alleged regulatory circumvention to the case.
