NEW DELHI (Gurpreet Singh) — In a major escalation of legal troubles for the Reliance Group, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) registered a second criminal case against Anil Ambani and M/s Reliance Communications (RCoM) on Thursday, February 26, 2026. This development follows the Enforcement Directorate’s (ED) recent attachment of Ambani’s Pali Hill residence and is based on a formal complaint lodged by the Bank of Baroda. The FIR alleges a massive financial conspiracy, cheating, and criminal misconduct, leading to a loss of over ₹2,220 crore for the public sector lender.
Immediately following the registration of the case, CBI teams carried out extensive search operations at Anil Ambani’s residence and the registered offices of RCoM. Investigators reportedly seized a significant volume of documents related to loan transactions and fictitious business dealings. The probe centers on allegations that RCoM diverted and misused loan funds through “fictitious transactions” with related parties, while simultaneously manipulating books of accounts to conceal deep-seated financial irregularities.
The Bank of Baroda account in question was declared a Non-Performing Asset (NPA) back in 2017. While the Bombay High Court had previously stayed the declaration of the accounts as “fraud” following a petition by Ambani, that stay was vacated on February 23, 2026. The removal of this legal shield prompted the Bank of Baroda to move forward with its complaint. This case is distinct from a previous CBI investigation launched by the State Bank of India (SBI); while the SBI case involves a consortium of 11 banks, the new case specifically addresses loans provided by Bank of Baroda, Vijaya Bank, and Dena Bank (the latter two have since merged with Bank of Baroda).
The FIR invokes various sections of the Prevention of Corruption Act, alleging that Ambani and other RCoM officials abused their official positions to facilitate the fraud. As the CBI continues to scrutinize the seized evidence, the investigation is expected to broaden into the network of shell companies allegedly used for the diversion of funds. The dual pressure from the ED’s asset attachment and the CBI’s fresh FIR marks one of the most significant legal challenges faced by the embattled industrialist to date.
