Two fresh agency notes land in the ADAG loan PIL; the bench will not yet say who in ‘top management’ was examined.

The Supreme Court on Monday, 24 August 2026, took on record fresh status reports filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation and the Enforcement Directorate in the public-interest litigation by former Union secretary E.A.S. Sarma seeking a court-monitored investigation into alleged bank-loan fraud involving companies of the Anil Dhirubhai Ambani Group. Taking reports on record is a docket step. It is not a finding of fraud.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta told the bench that two fresh status reports had been filed, one each by the Enforcement Directorate and the Central Bureau of Investigation. The court said they were taken on record. The matters were listed for further hearing on another date. That next date is not in the public account used here. This desk will not invent it.

Advocate Prashant Bhushan asked the agencies also to place charge-sheets and said it needed to be seen whether they had examined the role of the top management. Chief Justice of India Surya Kant asked whether top management meant only one person. The Solicitor General said the agencies had examined the top management. A Solicitor General’s assertion that top management has been examined is an oral statement in court. It is not a published list of who was questioned, and the bench did not, on Monday, write who in top management has actually been examined. This desk will not invent those names.

Two money figures sit on this file and this desk will keep both. The public-interest litigation figure cited on the Monday desk is an alleged ₹40,000 crore bank-loan fraud. Separately, the same desk cites the government line that alleged loss in Central Bureau of Investigation cases totals ₹27,337 crore. ₹40,000 crore is the petition headline. ₹27,337 crore is the government figure as reported. This desk will not merge them into a single invented loss.

Background already on the record, and not new Monday events, includes seven Central Bureau of Investigation cases against the Anil Ambani-led Reliance Group on complaints by public-sector banks and the Life Insurance Corporation; May searches at seven locations in Mumbai, Gurugram and Bengaluru linked to Reliance Communications; earlier arrests of Reliance Communications executives D. Vishwanath and Anil Kalya in April; and, in July, the court’s decline to direct arrest of any individual. Seven cases, seven search locations, two named April arrests, and a July refusal to order an arrest remain the background ledger. They are not Monday’s operative step. Monday’s operative step is the taking on record of two fresh agency notes.

New Delhi holds the Supreme Court hearing. Form B and any poll date are not notified. This desk will not invent a chargesheet date for a Group Managing Director, a sealed-cover extract, or a next listing the tip does not lock.

Until the bench reads the notes in open court and writes further, the public ledger is two fresh status reports taken on record, one from each agency, a Solicitor General line that top management has been examined without a named list, a Chief Justice question about whether top management means only one person, an unmerged pair of money books — alleged ₹40,000 crore on the petition and alleged ₹27,337 crore on the government line — seven Central Bureau of Investigation cases already registered, May searches at seven locations, April arrests of D. Vishwanath and Anil Kalya, and a July order that declined to direct any arrest. Every crore remains allegation. Monday’s order convicted nobody.