New Delhi [India], July 1 : The Rouse Avenue Court extended the judicial custody of Gautam Bhailal Doshi for 14 days. He was produced before the court after the expiry of the previous Judicial custody.
He has been arrested in arrested in Reliance Communications (RCom) money laundering case. He is a former Reliance ADAG Group MD.
Special Judge Ajay Gupta extended the judicial custody of Gautam Doshi for 14 days after considering the application moved by the ED.
He was remanded in judicial custody on June 17.
On June 13 he was remanded in the ED custody considering the submissions of ED, the nature of the allegations and to unearth the complete conspiracy as well as establish the complete fund trail, their recovery, role of other individuals involved.
"I deem it fit to grant 5 days' custody of the accused to the ED. Accordingly, the accused is remanded to the custody of ED for 5 days, and he shall now be produced on 18.06.2026 at or before 04.00 p.m. before the Vacation Judge, Rouse Avenue District Courts, New Delhi," the Vacation Judge ordered on June 13.
It is alleged against Gautam Bhailal Doshi that he occupied a position of substantial authority and control within the Reliance ADA Group and was deeply associated with its financial, corporate and offshore operations.
The investigation has revealed that he functioned as one of the Group Managing Directors of the Reliance ADA Group, was a Director of Reliance Telecom Limited during the relevant period, was a member of its Audit Committee, exercised banking authority over 161 bank accounts maintained by 105 group entities, and was entrusted with responsibilities relating to overseas financing arrangements, FCCB issuances, foreign bank accounts and offshore corporate structures.
The court had noted that the material collected during the investigation establishes his active involvement in the management, supervision and control of the financial framework through which funds were raised, routed and deployed across domestic and overseas entities.
As per the ED, the Primary allegations are that the credit facilities availed by RCOM, M/s Reliance Telecom Ltd. and M/s Reliance Infratel Ltd., together the group is referred as Reliance Anil Dheerajlal Ambani Group (RAAG) from a consortium of banks, through multiple banking arrangements by misrepresentation and deception.
It is further alleged that after disbursal of the said facilities, the bank funds were misappropriated by entering into transactions which were in violation of the terms and conditions of the sanction of the credit facilities.
The ED also alleged that RAAG undertook credit facilities from non-consortium banks during the same period, which comprises a set of inter-connected transactions, as the credit facilities taken from consortium banks have been used for payments of non-consortium credit facilities as well.
It is alleged that the total outstanding amounts from the consortium banks as well as the non-consortium banks, which constitute proceeds of crime, are approximately Rs 40,000 crores.
The investigation so far has established a fund trail showing diversion of loan funds from RAAG to foreign remittances, foreign banks and offshore companies. The funds so availed from certain banks were not utilised for the intended purpose but were invested in mutual funds and transferred to group companies. These are detailed in the application seeking remand.
The court had noted in the order the evidence collected during investigation, including the email dated 21.09.2012 enclosing "Company Details.xls", board records, audit committee records, financial statements, banking records and statements recorded under Section 50 of the PMLA, demonstrates that the accused was not a passive or nominal functionary but occupied a position from which he exercised significant influence and control over group entities, banking arrangements and offshore structures.
The material further reveals that information relating to Indian and offshore entities, shareholding structures, banking arrangements and financial operations was regularly escalated to him and operated under his supervision.
While seeking remand the ED had said that custodial interrogation of the accused is necessary to ascertain the complete conspiracy behind the diversion and layering of loan funds; determine the decision-making process relating to the creation and operation of intermediary and offshore entities; identify the ultimate beneficiaries of the diverted funds; confront him with seized emails, electronic records, financial documents and witness statements; and trace further domestic and overseas assets acquired, held or controlled from proceeds of crime.
The agency further said that his custodial interrogation is also essential to uncover the complete mechanism adopted for acquisition, possession, concealment, layering, routing and dissipation of proceeds of crime.
The counsel for the accused had opposed the remand application and submitted that from the ED's application it is evident that the accused has been cooperating throughout the investigation and since the recording of his statement under Section 50 of the PMLA on 27.01.2026, there is no allegation against him of having done anything prejudicing the investigation.
It was also submitted that considering his age, he being around 74 years old, as well as the medical ailments from which he is suffering, he may not be remanded to custody for 14 days as sought by ED.