4 months ago
2
The Bombay High Court connected Wednesday (December 24, 2025) granted interim alleviation to Anil D. Ambani, restraining Bank of Baroda, IDBI Bank and Indian Overseas Bank from acting connected show-cause notices and fraud classification orders issued against him on the ground of a forensic audit study prepared by BDO LLP (Binder Dijker Otte Limited Liability Partnership).
Justice Milind N. Jadhav held that the report, dated October 15, 2020, was “prima facie inconclusive and incomplete” and not signed by a qualified Chartered Accountant arsenic mandated nether law.
“Once it is an admitted presumption that Defendant No. 3 is the sole writer and signatory of the study and helium is not a qualified Chartered Accountant though helium whitethorn person immense acquisition and clasp certificates and citations from assorted Institutes astir the satellite successful the tract forensic investigation, but helium inactive does not suffice to beryllium an Auditor wrong the requisite qualification nether the applicable statutes to motion the FAR (Forensic Audit Report) successful India,” the tribunal observed successful its Order.
The justice noted that Reserve Bank of India’s (RBI) Master Directions, both 2016 and 2024, require outer auditors to beryllium qualified nether applicable statutes, which see Sections 141 and 145 of the Companies Act, 2013. “Appointment of Auditor, whether interior oregon outer adjacent nether the 2016 RBI Master Directions has to conform to the applicable statute. It volition different pb to a disastrous concern wherein determination volition beryllium a wide dichotomy,” Justice Jadhav said.
ED questions Anil Ambani’s lad for 2nd consecutive time successful wealth laundering case
The quality stems from forensic audits ordered by a consortium of 20 banks led by State Bank of India into Reliance Communications and its radical entities for the play 2013-2017. The lenders had an vulnerability of ₹31,580 crore to the companies. The forensic study alleged diversion of funds, including ₹12,692 crore to related parties and ₹6,265 crore to repay different slope loans. Mr. Ambani argued that the audit was flawed, delayed acold beyond the six-month timeline prescribed nether RBI norms, and violated principles of earthy justice.
Senior Advocate Gaurav Joshi, appearing for Mr. Ambani, argued that the forensic audit study (FAR) was prepared by an entity lacking statutory qualification. “Clause 4.1 work with Footnote 14 of the 2024 RBI Master Directions mandates Forensic Audit indispensable beryllium conducted by an auditor who is qualified arsenic auditor nether the applicable statutes. The FAR prepared by Defendant No.2 – BDO LLP is not an entity competent to behaviour the External Audit,” he submitted.
Mr. Joshi pointed retired that the signatory of the study was not a Chartered Accountant, and the steadfast was not registered with ICAI. “Sections 2(b), 2(e) and 6 of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 restrict audit signifier to ICAI registered Chartered Accountants holding valid Certificate of Practice,” helium said, adding that the study lacked a Unique Document Identification Number (UDIN) mandated by ICAI.
Senior Advocate Ashish Kamat, besides for Mr. Ambani, added that IDBI Bank’s show-cause announcement was issued without providing supporting documents. Advocate Mayur Khandeparkar, appearing successful the 3rd suit, contended that Bank of Baroda’s fraud classification bid was based solely connected the aforesaid FAR.
Senior Advocate Zal Andhyarujina, for Indian Overseas Bank, argued that the request of a Chartered Accountant was introduced lone successful 2024. “Under the 2016 RBI Master Directions nary qualification is prescribed for the Auditor to beryllium a CA. Footnote 14 successful the 2024 RBI Master Directions volition person to be considered as prospective,” he submitted.
Senior Advocate Kevic Setalvad, for Bank of Baroda, said the suit was barred by regulation and amounted to “clever drafting.” Senior Advocate Zarir Bharucha, for IDBI Bank, maintained that the slope followed the 2016 directions and provided idiosyncratic hearings. Advocate Kunal Dwarkadas, for BDO LLP, defended the firm’s competence, saying “Defendant No.3 is simply a seasoned forensic professional skill and competence bash not needfully bespeak qualification of the nonrecreational arsenic a CA only.”
The tribunal flagged superior procedural lapses, including the auditor’s anterior engagement with lender banks earlier ceremonial appointment, compromising independence. “A Forensic Auditor’s independence is highly important for objectivity, association of Defendant No.2 with the Lender Banks arsenic Consultant intelligibly creates a conflicting position,” Justice Jadhav noted.
The court also criticised banks for ignoring RBI timelines and the hold beyond six months, “The Master Directions of RBI are not a specified insubstantial tiger. Banks person behaved successful a mode by throwing caution to the wind.” The justice stressed that banks are custodians of nationalist wealth and indispensable strictly travel RBI norms, “Money with Banks is nationalist money. RBI Master Directions are required to be followed to the hilt truthful that wealth borrowed should not beryllium lost.”
Holding that Mr. Ambani had made retired a beardown prima facie case, the tribunal stayed each actions taken nether oregon successful reliance upon the forensic study and the impugned notices. “Allowing the impugned enactment to proceed volition pb to disastrous consequences successful specified cases wherever it leads to a definite civilian decease without trial,” the justice said.
Senior advocates for the banks and BDO LLP sought a six-week stay, which the tribunal declined.
