Jharkhand liquor scam: Rohit Oraon skips ED summons, Rameshwar Oraon to be questioned June 30
Synopsis
Rohit Oraon, son of former Jharkhand Finance Minister Rameshwar Oraon, skipped an ED summons on 29 June in the state's liquor scam case — and now his father faces questioning the very next day. With ₹30 lakh recovered from Rohit's residence in 2023 raids and Chhattisgarh-based firms at the centre of the probe, the investigation is visibly climbing the political ladder.
Key Takeaways
Rohit Oraon did not appear before the ED on 29 June in the alleged Jharkhand liquor scam case.
Both Rohit and former Finance Minister Rameshwar Oraon have separately sought more time to prepare documents for their defence.
Rameshwar Oraon has been summoned for ED questioning on 30 June . ₹30 lakh in cash was recovered from Rohit Oraon's Ranchi residence during searches at 32 locations on 23 August 2023 .
The ED's ECIR is based on FIR No.
9/2025 filed by the ACB , which named 10 accused including senior IAS officer Vinay Chaubey .
If either Oraon fails to appear, the agency may issue fresh summons within a week.
Rohit Oraon, son of Jharkhand Congress MLA and former Finance Minister Rameshwar Oraon, skipped an Enforcement Directorate (ED) summons on Monday, 29 June, failing to appear for questioning in connection with the alleged Jharkhand liquor scam. Rohit has written to the agency requesting additional time, while his father has been separately summoned for questioning on 30 June.
Why Both Oraons Sought More Time
According to sources, both Rohit Oraon and Rameshwar Oraon communicated independently to the ED that they require more time to compile documents related to their defence. The agency has not yet responded to either request. Sources indicated that if either fails to appear on the stipulated date, the ED may issue fresh summons within a week.
What the ED Is Investigating
The ED is probing the alleged money trail and the role of private companies in the rollout of Jharkhand's new excise policy. Investigators reportedly suspect that Rohit Oraon played a role in the process through which certain Chhattisgarh-based companies were awarded contracts for liquor supply and manpower services in the state. The agency is specifically scrutinising financial transactions and digital evidence linked to the entry of a Chhattisgarh-based firm into Jharkhand and the award of contracts to it.
Searches, Cash Recovery, and PMLA Case
On 23 August 2023, the ED conducted searches at 32 locations across Ranchi, Dhanbad, Giridih, Deoghar, Dumka, Godda, Jamtara, and Kolkata. During those searches, ₹30 lakh in cash was recovered from Rohit Oraon's residence in Ranchi. The agency is examining possible links between the seized cash and alleged investments. The ED registered an Enforcement Case Information Report (ECIR) under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), based on FIR No. 9/2025 filed by the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB).
Key Accused Named in the FIR
The ACB named 10 accused in the case, including senior IAS officer Vinay Chaubey, then Joint Secretary of the Excise Department Gajendra Singh, and Vinay Singh, among others. The ED has already questioned some accused persons currently in judicial custody. The investigation is now reportedly expanding to political and administrative levels, with the agency examining the flow of funds, investments, and the role of beneficiaries linked to the alleged irregularities.
What Happens Next
All eyes are on 30 June, when Rameshwar Oraon is scheduled to appear before the ED. Should either of the Oraons fail to comply, fresh summons are expected within days. This comes amid a broader pattern of ED scrutiny of state-level excise policy irregularities across India, making the Jharkhand case a closely watched probe at the intersection of politics, administration, and alleged financial misconduct.
Point of View
Cash recoveries, and summons that gradually move up the political hierarchy. What makes this case notable is the speed at which the investigation has shifted from administrative actors to a sitting MLA's family. Rameshwar Oraon's summons the day after his son's no-show is not coincidental; it signals the agency is tightening the net. The key question mainstream coverage is not asking: why did the ACB file the FIR in 2025 for a policy implemented years earlier, and what changed politically to accelerate the timeline? That context matters as much as the summons themselves.
NationPress
29 Jun 2026
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the Jharkhand liquor scam?
The Jharkhand liquor scam refers to alleged irregularities in the implementation of the state's new excise policy, including suspected manipulation of contract awards for liquor supply and manpower services to benefit certain Chhattisgarh-based companies. The ED is probing the money trail under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), based on an FIR filed by the Anti-Corruption Bureau.
Why did Rohit Oraon skip the ED summons?
Rohit Oraon did not appear before the ED on 29 June, citing the need for more time to prepare documents related to his defence. He communicated this request to the agency in writing; the ED had not yet responded to the request as of the date of this report.
Who is Rameshwar Oraon and why is he being questioned?
Rameshwar Oraon is a Jharkhand Congress MLA and former Finance Minister. He has been summoned by the ED for questioning on 30 June in connection with the alleged liquor scam, as the investigation expands to political and administrative levels.
What did the ED find during the 2023 raids?
On 23 August 2023, the ED searched 32 locations across Ranchi, Dhanbad, Giridih, Deoghar, Dumka, Godda, Jamtara, and Kolkata. Investigators recovered ₹30 lakh in cash from Rohit Oraon's residence in Ranchi and are examining possible links between the cash and alleged investments.
Who else has been named in the Jharkhand liquor scam case?
The ACB's FIR named 10 accused, including senior IAS officer Vinay Chaubey, then Joint Secretary of the Excise Department Gajendra Singh, and Vinay Singh, among others. The ED has already questioned some of the accused who are in judicial custody.
