ED files fresh PMLA complaint over alleged Rs 14.95 crore FD siphoning from ADCL
The ED has filed a supplementary complaint against five accused in Bengaluru, alleging Rs 14.95 crore of ADCL fixed deposits were siphoned using a fake bank account and forged papers.
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has filed a supplementary prosecution complaint against five accused before the Special Court (PMLA) in Bengaluru, in a case involving the alleged siphoning of about Rs 14.95 crore of fixed deposits belonging to Dr. B.R. Ambedkar Development Corporation Ltd. (ADCL). The complaint was filed on 5 October 2026, and the ED announced it on 14 October 2026.
What Happened
The ED's money-laundering case is based on an FIR registered by the CBI's Anti-Corruption Branch in Bengaluru under the Indian Penal Code and the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, which are listed as scheduled offences under the PMLA.
According to the ED, a fake current account in the name of ADCL was opened at the HAL II Stage branch of State Bank of Mysore in Bengaluru using forged documents and impersonation. The ED alleges that four fixed deposits of Rs 5 crore each belonging to ADCL were then closed early using forged deposit receipts and fabricated pre-closure letters, resulting in the siphoning of about Rs 14.95 crore.
The ED has alleged that this money was then moved through several bank accounts of individuals and entities, followed by transfers and cash withdrawals, to hide where it came from. This process is known as layering. The agency said statements recorded under Section 50 of the PMLA showed the funds were knowingly received, transferred and withdrawn as part of the laundering.
Earlier, on 25 March 2026, the ED filed a prosecution complaint against 15 accused persons and entities and asked the court to confiscate assets worth about Rs 6.02 crore. On 22 July 2026, it issued a second provisional attachment order covering a property worth Rs 24 lakh belonging to one accused. A provisional attachment must be confirmed by the Adjudicating Authority under the PMLA. The ED said further investigation is in progress.
These are allegations, not findings of guilt; the accused are presumed innocent until proven guilty in court, and due process continues.
What It Means
The case, as described by the ED, involved fixed deposits being closed early through forged receipts and letters routed through a fake account. The special court will now examine the supplementary complaint alongside the earlier one, and any confiscation of assets depends on the court's decision.
This report describes enforcement actions and allegations on the public record, attributed to the officials cited. An order, FIR or chargesheet is not a conviction; parties are presumed innocent until proven guilty.
Named in this report, or spotted an error? Corrections and responses: editor@oquilia.com. We correct errors promptly and record responses from named parties.
Sources & Citations
- Enforcement Directorate press release — Enforcement Directorate