The Delhi High Court has denied bail to Ashok Kumar Pal, the former Chief Financial Officer of Reliance Power Limited, in a significant money laundering case. This case centers around a fraudulent bank guarantee exceeding ₹68 crore related to a tender by the Solar Energy Corporation of India (SECI).
On Wednesday, Justice Madhu Jain, presiding over the vacation bench, emphasized that although the evidence presented by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) will be scrutinized during the trial, it cannot be dismissed when considering bail. The court remarked, “In light of the allegations and the evidence presented by the Directorate of Enforcement, including statements recorded under Section 50 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), as well as documentary and electronic evidence gathered during the investigation, this Court cannot conclude that there are reasonable grounds to believe the Applicant is not guilty of the alleged offense. Consequently, the twin conditions under Section 45 of the PMLA remain unmet at this stage.”
The controversy traces back to a SECI tender in June 2024 for developing a 1,000 megawatt Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) project. Reliance Power had partnered with Biswal Tradelink to secure a bank guarantee for this tender. However, SECI issued a show cause notice in September 2024, alerting Reliance Power that the bank guarantee was fraudulent. As a result, SECI prohibited Reliance Power and its subsidiary, Reliance NU BESS Limited, from tender participation for three years. The High Court later issued a stay on this debarment notice on November 26, 2024.
Pal had initiated a complaint with the Economic Offences Wing against Biswal Tradelink, leading to the registration of a First Information Report (FIR) in Delhi. Subsequently, the ED launched money laundering proceedings under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, to delve into the alleged fraud. Through its investigation, the ED included Pal as an accused in a supplementary prosecution complaint, resulting in his arrest in October 2025.
Representing Pal, Senior Advocate N Hariharan argued that his client has been detained for over eight months, which should weigh heavily in the case. Hariharan highlighted that the Supreme Court has, in numerous instances, ruled that Article 21 of the Constitution should supersede Section 45 of the PMLA. He further contended that the trial has yet to commence and is unlikely to conclude soon, given the extensive list of 72 witnesses and substantial evidence to be reviewed.
More Read
Opposing the bail plea, Special Counsel for the ED, Zoheb Hossain, presented strong resistance. Other legal representatives for Pal included Advocates Varun Chandiok, Alok Kumar, Sidharth Yadav, and Arpit Mahendru. Counsel Vivek Gurnani, with Advocates Pranjal Tripathi, Kanishk Maurya, and Tanvi Jain, represented the ED.
