Shopping cart
Your cart empty!
Terms of use dolor sit amet consectetur, adipisicing elit. Recusandae provident ullam aperiam quo ad non corrupti sit vel quam repellat ipsa quod sed, repellendus adipisci, ducimus ea modi odio assumenda.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet consectetur adipisicing elit. Sequi, cum esse possimus officiis amet ea voluptatibus libero! Dolorum assumenda esse, deserunt ipsum ad iusto! Praesentium error nobis tenetur at, quis nostrum facere excepturi architecto totam.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet consectetur adipisicing elit. Inventore, soluta alias eaque modi ipsum sint iusto fugiat vero velit rerum.
Sequi, cum esse possimus officiis amet ea voluptatibus libero! Dolorum assumenda esse, deserunt ipsum ad iusto! Praesentium error nobis tenetur at, quis nostrum facere excepturi architecto totam.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet consectetur adipisicing elit. Inventore, soluta alias eaque modi ipsum sint iusto fugiat vero velit rerum.
Dolor sit amet consectetur adipisicing elit. Sequi, cum esse possimus officiis amet ea voluptatibus libero! Dolorum assumenda esse, deserunt ipsum ad iusto! Praesentium error nobis tenetur at, quis nostrum facere excepturi architecto totam.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet consectetur adipisicing elit. Inventore, soluta alias eaque modi ipsum sint iusto fugiat vero velit rerum.
Sit amet consectetur adipisicing elit. Sequi, cum esse possimus officiis amet ea voluptatibus libero! Dolorum assumenda esse, deserunt ipsum ad iusto! Praesentium error nobis tenetur at, quis nostrum facere excepturi architecto totam.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet consectetur adipisicing elit. Inventore, soluta alias eaque modi ipsum sint iusto fugiat vero velit rerum.
Do you agree to our terms? Sign up
Industrialist Anil Ambani has withdrawn his petition challenging IDBI Bank’s fraud proceedings related to a ₹750 crore loan issued to Reliance Communications Ltd (RCom). The Bombay High Court refused to grant interim relief, prompting Ambani to inform the bench that he would appear before the bank’s fraud committee “under protest.”
The petition, filed by Ambani through advocates Ankit Lohia and Ameet Naik, had requested the court to halt the bank’s personal hearing until all relevant materials were shared with him. The plea argued that proceeding without full disclosure of documents would cause “grave prejudice” to the petitioner’s defense.
Representing IDBI Bank, advocates Zarir Bharucha, Dhwani Gala, and Rishi Thakur opposed the petition, contending it was “not maintainable.” The bank stated it had already provided Ambani with the complete forensic audit report, including annexures, which formed the basis of action under the Reserve Bank of India’s (RBI) Master Directions on Fraud Risk Management in Commercial Banks.
The bank’s counsel added that Ambani was granted multiple opportunities to appear for a personal hearing but had chosen not to attend. The next scheduled hearing before the fraud examination committee is on October 30, 2025, and the bank maintained that all actions are being conducted in full compliance with RBI guidelines.
After hearing arguments from both sides, Justice Sandesh D. Patil of the Bombay High Court declined to grant interim relief to Ambani. Following the court’s observation, advocate Lohia, on Ambani’s instructions, withdrew the petition and confirmed that his client would appear before IDBI’s committee under protest.
Lohia also requested permission for Ambani to raise all arguments before the bank during the hearing and to approach the court again if the outcome proves unfavorable. The court allowed this request and disposed of the petition as withdrawn without commenting on the merits of the case.
IDBI Bank’s action is based on RBI’s Master Directions on Fraud Risk Management, which empower banks to classify borrowers and directors as “fraudulent” if financial misconduct, fund diversion, or misuse of loans is detected. The ₹750 crore loan in question was extended to Reliance Communications Ltd, a company that later entered insolvency proceedings after defaulting on its debt obligations.
The case highlights ongoing scrutiny of corporate loan defaults in India and the regulatory push for stricter accountability under RBI’s revised fraud risk framework.
16
Published: Oct 29, 2025