Supreme Court – Daily Orders
Rajeev Kumar Rana vs Serious Fraud Investigation Office on 10 April, 2026
Author: Dipankar Datta
Bench: Dipankar Datta
CORRECTED
NON-REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1868 OF 2026
[arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.2931 of 2026]
RAJEEV KUMAR RANA … APPELLANT
VS.
SERIOUS FRAUD INVESTIGATION OFFICE … RESPONDENT
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. The High Court of Punjab & Haryana, by the impugned judgment and
order dated 22nd December, 2025, has rejected the application 1 filed by
the appellant seeking bail.
3. Appellant (A-177) was arrested on 22nd July, 2022 in relation to criminal
complaint bearing CIS No. COMA/05/20192 dated 18th May, 2019 filed by
the respondent (SFIO) under Sections 417, 418, 420, 477-A and Section
120-B of Indian Penal Code, 1872 and Sections 58-A, 211(7), 227 and
628 of the Companies Act, 1956. Proceedings arising therefrom are
pending in the Court of the Additional Sessions Judge/Special Court,
Gurugram.
4. It is alleged that the Adarsh Group of Companies, along with its 125
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
rashmi dhyani pant
Date: 2026.04.13 LLPs, siphoned off funds amounting to several crores, belonging to
20:01:56 IST
Reason:
approximately two lakh depositors of Adarsh Credit Cooperative Society
Ltd., on the basis of false and fabricated financial statements. Appellant
1 CRM-M-23555-2025
2 SFIO versus Adarsh Build Estate and others
is stated to have held an 18% share in the ABJ Project at Dehradun,
which was undertaken by Adarsh Build Estate. In his capacity as an
authorized signatory of the said project, the appellant is alleged to have
siphoned off an amount exceeding ₹80 crore.
5. We have heard learned senior counsel for the appellant and the learned
Additional Solicitor General for the respondent.
6. The complaint pertains to the year 2019; however, charges are yet to be
framed. Even if the trial were to commence in the near future, its
conclusion is likely to take a considerable period of time. The total
number of accused persons is stated to be 185, out of which 65
individuals have already been granted bail. It further appears that
properties of the appellant worth more than Rs. 93 crore have been
attached by the respondent, which is more than what is alleged to have
been siphoned off by him.
7. Besides, the appellant is a first-time offender and has been in judicial
custody for the last 3.5 years. He has, thus, undergone more than one-
third of the maximum sentence of 10 years prescribed under Section
447 of the Companies Act, 2013. Consequently, the appellant is entitled
to the benefit of statutory bail under Section 479 of the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 20233.
8. In view thereof, the appeal deserves acceptance.
9. Accordingly, the impugned judgment and order refusing bail is set aside,
and it is directed that the appellant be released on bail, subject to
furnishing the requisite bond or bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial
Court, in accordance with the provisions of Section 479 of the BNSS, and
on such further terms and conditions the Trial Court deems appropriate
to impose.
3 BNSS
10. Needless to observe, the appellant shall co-operate in the trial, shall not,
directly or indirectly, induce, threat, promise or dissuade any person
acquainted with the facts of the case from disclosing such facts to the
investigation authority or to the court.
11. Appellant shall appear before the Trial Court on the dates fixed, unless
exempted; and should the appellant fail to appear on any date without
justifiable cause or breach any of the terms and conditions for grant of
bail, the Trial Court shall be at liberty to cancel the bail.
12. We clarify that the observations made in this order and grant of bail will
not be treated as findings on the merits of the case.
13. The appeal is allowed on the above terms.
14. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed.
………..…………………J.
(DIPANKAR DATTA)
…………..………………J.
(SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA)
NEW DELHI.
APRIL 10, 2026.
REVISED
ITEM NO.6 COURT NO.8 SECTION II-B
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.2931/2026
[Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 22-12-
2025 in CRM-M No.23555/2025 passed by the High Court of Punjab
& Haryana at Chandigarh]
RAJEEV KUMAR RANA Petitioner
VERSUS
SERIOUS FRAUD INVESTIGATION OFFICE Respondent
FOR ADMISSION
I.A. No.52431/2026-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T.
I.A. No.52432/2026-PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL
DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ ANNEXURES
Date : 10-04-2026 This matter was called on for hearing today.
CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DIPANKAR DATTA
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
For Petitioner(s) :Mr. Mukul Rohtagi, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Ajit Sharma, AOR
Mr. Sameer Rohtagi, Adv.
Mr. Anant Ram Mishra, Adv.
Mr. Yuvrajsinh C. Solanki, Adv.
Mr. Kanchan Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Aditya Vikram Singh, Adv.
Mr. Parul Goyal, Adv.
Mr. Lareb Habib Ansari, Adv.
For Respondent(s) :Mr. S. D. Sanjay, ASG
Mr. Divyam Aggarwal, Adv.
Mr. Arkaj Kumar, Adv.
Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Adv.
Mr. Raj Bahadur Yadav, AOR
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed non-reportable order.
3. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
(RASHMI DHYANI PANT) (SUDHIR KUMAR SHARMA)
ASST. REGISTRAR-CUM-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)
(corrected signed non-reportable order is placed on the file)
4