Advertisement
The CBI has registered a case against Jai Anmol Anil Ambani and Reliance Home Finance Ltd. (RHFL) following a complaint from Union Bank of India, formerly Andhra Bank. The bank has alleged that the company defaulted on credit limits sanctioned for business requirements and caused a loss of about INR 228 crore. A forensic review by Grant Thornton found diversion and misappropriation of borrowed funds during the 2016-2019 period. The account had already slipped into NPA status in 2019. The case also names Director Ravindra Sharad Sudhakar.
The CBI initiated a case this past week against Jai Anmol Anil Ambani and Reliance Home Finance Ltd. (RHFL) after Union Bank of India, earlier known as Andhra Bank, filed a complaint alleging cheating and financial irregularities that resulted in a loss of nearly INR 228 crore to the public sector lender. Advertisement
According to the bank's complaint, RHFL had obtained credit limits totalling INR 450 crore from the bank's SCF branch in Mumbai to support its business operations. These facilities were approved with conditions relating to financial discipline, which included timely repayment of dues, servicing of interest, proper submission of security documents and other required papers, and routing all sale proceeds through the designated bank account.
The bank stated that RHFL did not adhere to the repayment schedule, leading to the account being categorised as a non-performing asset at the end of September 2019. The lender then initiated a forensic audit to understand the use of funds.
Grant Thornton was appointed to conduct a detailed forensic examination covering the period from April 2016 to June 2019. The review found that the borrowed funds were misapportioned and indicated diversion of funds to purposes other than those for which the finance was originally approved.
The bank alleged that the former promoters and directors of RHFL, including Jai Anmol Anil Ambani and Ravindra Sharad Sudhakar, engaged in manipulation of accounts and misappropriation of funds. It further claimed that the accused persons had breached their fiduciary responsibilities and diverted or siphoned off the money instead of deploying it for business operations.
This case is part of a broader pattern of investigations into financial irregularities involving non-banking financial companies where lenders have reported suspected fund diversion following repayment failures.
Source PTI
5th Jun, 2025
25th May, 2023
11th May, 2023
27th Apr, 2023
Advertisement
Facebook
Whatsapp
