Supreme Court flags ARC-borrower-bank scam, seeks replies NEW DELHI: Expressing concern over an alleged nexus between asset reconstruction companies (ARCs), borrowers and banks resulting in the siphoning of thousands of crores of public money, Supreme Court Friday sought responses from Union home and finance ministries as well as RBI and Serious Fraud Investigation Office in relation to such a scam involving JKM Infra Projects.Appearing for a PIL petitioners, advocate Ashwini Upadhyay told a bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justice V Mohana that a debt of Rs 1,537 crore owed to public sector banks has been settled through two ARCs — Prudent and Phoenix — for a mere Rs 73.5 crore, resulting in a huge loss of public money.The petitioner alleged that JKM Infra, a Noida-based infrastructure company controlled by the Jalan family, had taken Rs 912 crore loan from a consortium of seven banks led by State Bank of India between 2012-15 against a meagre collateral of Rs 72 crore. Soon the firm defaulted, and a forensic audit by Ernst & Young in May 2018 found that more than Rs 902 crore were siphoned to shell companies, non-existent vendors, forged work orders and undisclosed bank accounts.Despite this finding, SBI didn’t classify the account as fraud and auctioned the loan to sole bidder Prudent ARC at 75% discount for a sum of Rs 120 crore against a debt of Rs 596 crore, the petitioners alleged. During the proceedings before the debt recovery tribunal, the debt was transferred to Phoenix ARC in 2025 at Rs 73.5 crore against a total outstanding of Rs 1,537 crore, it was alleged.“The police attempted to close the first FIR as a mere family dispute, but the trial court rejected the closure report in Jan 2026 and directed investigation into the E&Y forensic findings. The directorate of enforcement, the income tax criminal investigation wing, RBI, and the ministry of corporate affairs have all received detailed representations, but none of them have taken any appropriate and meaningful action to date,” they claimed.The bench asked the respondents, including SBI, Canara Bank, Union Bank of India, JKM Infra and its promoters, SEBI, two ARCs and E&Y, to file their responses to the PIL in four weeks and said, “We will not spare anyone. Bankers indulging in such activities is unfortunate.”On the sale of debt to ARCs, it said, “This is the cleverest device adopted by the banks. Sell the outstanding debt at 10% of the dues and allow the borrower to wriggle out of the liabilities. We do not want to go into the commercial wisdom of the banks. But if this is the commercial wisdom — give taxpayers money and make no attempt to recover it — then it would require investigation.”The bench also doubted the credentials of the PIL petitioners but said, “There is a dire need to look into the conduct of ARCs who give a complete go-by to the recovery process. There appears to be a deep-rooted nexus between ARCs, borrowers and banks for misutilisation and siphoning of public money.”Get the latest India news and live updates. Download the TOI App.End of ArticleFollow Us On Social MediaVideosContradicting Supreme Court and Tribunal Orders?: TN Assembly’s Firm Stand Against ProjectRare Handshake At LoC During Pakistani National’s Repatriation Draws Attention Across BorderJaishankar Says Global Appreciation For Indian Talent Is Growing RapidlyCongress Wins 5 Of 7 Karnataka MLC Seats, BJP Probes Suspected Cross-VotingRSS At 100: Why The Organisation Remains Unregistered And Why The Issue Keeps Returning?From Net-Zero Design To Cargo Hub: What Makes Jewar Airport Different?Why Brahmins Are Suddenly At The Centre Of UP’s 2027 Political Battle | SP vs BSP vs BJP ExplainedTMC Escalates Battle To Delhi As Abhishek Banerjee Seeks Action On Rebel MPsJio Files DRHP With SEBI | Mukesh Ambani Hands IPO Leadership To Isha, Akash & AnantFrom ‘Brother-in-Ideals’ To A Cold Greeting: Stalin’s Message Exposes DMK-Congress Rift123PhotostoriesLove Poha for breakfast? 6 ways to add 20 gms protein to each servingNew York’s first lady Rama Duwaji made bootleg Knicks merch look runway-readyFrom earning Rs 700 in his first job to doing plays with Dilip Joshi and Disha Vakani: When Taarak Mehta Ka Ooltah Chashmah’s Tanmay Vekaria Aka Bagha got candid about his life5 signs of emotional manipulation in relationships, as per mental health counselor10 regional jackfruit dishes from across the world and why it is celebrated so muchFrom respecting Gauri Khan’s space to teaching his sons to respect women: 5 times Shah Rukh Khan proved he is Bollywood’s ultimate green flag10 baby girl names that mean pure in different languagesFrom Alia Bhatt to Katrina Kaif: Inside the pilates routine that keeps these Bollywood divas fit6 most beautiful hidden villages in India that are absolutely worth a tripWhy were women banned from doing makeup on Bollywood sets? Sonam Kapoor’s makeup artist explains the breaking of the 59-year-old barrier123Hot PicksEngland vs New ZealandYuvraj SinghUSA Vs AustraliaAP SSC resultsKannur University FYUGP TrialShiv SenaJD VanceStrait of HormuzHormoz nuclear power plantTop TrendingBihar gang-rapeUS-Iran Peace DealStock Market LiveFIFA World Cup 2026What is Legacy BadgeBEST bus strikeAIIMS BSc Nursing Admit CardMHT CET PCM 2nd attempt resultsGold rate todayIndia-UK FTA
NEW DELHI: Expressing concern over an alleged nexus between asset reconstruction companies (ARCs), borrowers and banks resulting in the siphoning of thousands of crores of public money, Supreme Court Friday sought responses from Union home and finance ministries as well as RBI and Serious Fraud Investigation Office in relation to such a scam involving JKM Infra Projects.Appearing for a PIL petitioners, advocate Ashwini Upadhyay told a bench of CJI Surya Kant and Justice V Mohana that a debt of Rs 1,537 crore owed to public sector banks has been settled through two ARCs — Prudent and Phoenix — for a mere Rs 73.5 crore, resulting in a huge loss of public money.The petitioner alleged that JKM Infra, a Noida-based infrastructure company controlled by the Jalan family, had taken Rs 912 crore loan from a consortium of seven banks led by State Bank of India between 2012-15 against a meagre collateral of Rs 72 crore. Soon the firm defaulted, and a forensic audit by Ernst & Young in May 2018 found that more than Rs 902 crore were siphoned to shell companies, non-existent vendors, forged work orders and undisclosed bank accounts.Despite this finding, SBI didn’t classify the account as fraud and auctioned the loan to sole bidder Prudent ARC at 75% discount for a sum of Rs 120 crore against a debt of Rs 596 crore, the petitioners alleged. During the proceedings before the debt recovery tribunal, the debt was transferred to Phoenix ARC in 2025 at Rs 73.5 crore against a total outstanding of Rs 1,537 crore, it was alleged.“The police attempted to close the first FIR as a mere family dispute, but the trial court rejected the closure report in Jan 2026 and directed investigation into the E&Y forensic findings. The directorate of enforcement, the income tax criminal investigation wing, RBI, and the ministry of corporate affairs have all received detailed representations, but none of them have taken any appropriate and meaningful action to date,” they claimed.The bench asked the respondents, including SBI, Canara Bank, Union Bank of India, JKM Infra and its promoters, SEBI, two ARCs and E&Y, to file their responses to the PIL in four weeks and said, “We will not spare anyone. Bankers indulging in such activities is unfortunate.”On the sale of debt to ARCs, it said, “This is the cleverest device adopted by the banks. Sell the outstanding debt at 10% of the dues and allow the borrower to wriggle out of the liabilities. We do not want to go into the commercial wisdom of the banks. But if this is the commercial wisdom — give taxpayers money and make no attempt to recover it — then it would require investigation.”The bench also doubted the credentials of the PIL petitioners but said, “There is a dire need to look into the conduct of ARCs who give a complete go-by to the recovery process. There appears to be a deep-rooted nexus between ARCs, borrowers and banks for misutilisation and siphoning of public money.”
