Court issues fresh transit warrant for Jhunjhunwala in ₹2,929-crore RCom case

The earlier warrant could not be executed within the stipulated time owing to logistical constraints and the accused’s custody in a parallel money laundering case in Delhi.

MUMBAI: A special Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) court on Saturday issued a fresh prisoner transit warrant for Amitabh Jhunjhunwala in the ₹2,929-crore bank fraud case linked to Reliance Communications (RCom) and its promoter Anil Ambani, after the earlier warrant could not be executed within the stipulated time owing to logistical constraints and the accused’s custody in a parallel money laundering case in Delhi.

(Shutterstock)

The case arises from a complaint by the State Bank of India (SBI) alleging a wrongful loss of ₹2,929 crore due to diversion and misuse of loan funds by Reliance Communications and its officials. Acting on the complaint, the CBI registered a first information report (FIR) in August 2025 against the company, Anil Ambani and others for alleged criminal conspiracy, cheating, criminal breach of trust and other offences.

Investigators have since carried out searches and custodial action against company executives, while examining fund flows across entities, even as courts have upheld the bank’s classification of the company’s loan account as fraud.

Allowing the CBI’s application in the present proceedings, special judge BY Phad held that “it will be proper to issue a fresh production warrant” for Jhunjhunwala and directed that the accused be produced before the court on May 19. A transit warrant “does not serve as authorisation to detain the accused if he is granted bail and becomes entitled to release” in the money laundering case in which he is in judicial custody in Tihar jail since April 20, the court clarified.

Although permission for execution of the earlier production warrant was obtained from a Delhi court on April 29, the approval came shortly before the scheduled production time, leaving insufficient window for transit arrangements, the court noted.

Jail authorities informed the court that it was “neither feasible nor practicable to physically produce the inmate” the same day due to escort and travel logistics requiring advance planning.

Opposing the plea, the defence argued that once the time stipulated in the original warrant had lapsed, there was no provision under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita to extend it, and cited the accused’s age and medical condition.

The court, however, left it to jail authorities to assess these concerns and directed that an appropriate report be submitted if the warrant cannot be executed on such grounds.

The case forms part of a broader scrutiny of the Anil Ambani-owned Reliance group entities based on complaints by multiple public sector banks regarding alleged diversion of funds.