Reliance Communications Limited PMLA attachments confirmed

Reliance Communications Limited said four asset-attachment orders under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 were confirmed in 2026, with three orders confirmed on April 10 and a fourth on August 25. RCOM also disclosed that it and Reliance Telecom Limited, or RTL, were named as accused in two prosecution-complaint matters.

Which RCOM attachment orders have been confirmed?

RCOM said the Adjudicating Authority under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, or PMLA, confirmed three provisional attachment orders on April 10, 2026. These were Provisional Attachment Order, or PAO, No. 32 of 2025 concerning Campion Properties Limited, or CPL, PAO No. 36 of 2025 concerning Reliance Realty Limited, or RRL, and PAO No. 40 of 2025 concerning assets of RCOM and RRL.

The common April 10, 2026 order followed a hearing on April 7 in Original Complaint Nos. 471, 475 and 507 of 2025. RCOM said the authority concluded, among other grounds, that the attached properties were direct proceeds of crime under Section 2(1)(u) of PMLA and were involved in money laundering. RCOM also said the attachments could adversely affect group asset values while the orders subsist.

PAO No. 19 of 2026, dated March 11, 2026, separately attached RCOM assets. RCOM filed its response to a Section 8(1) show-cause notice on June 15, 2026 after receiving an extension, followed by written submissions on August 13. The Adjudicating Authority confirmed that order under Section 8(3) on August 25, and RCOM said it has appealed the confirmation.

How long can RCOM's confirmed attachments remain in force?

RCOM said the April 10 and August 25 confirmation orders provide that attachment can remain in force during investigation for up to 365 days or until conclusion of PMLA-offence proceedings before the Special Court. This duration applies to the four confirmed orders, rather than the maximum 180-day period for a provisional attachment before confirmation.

Before the April 10 confirmations, the Delhi High Court disposed of writ petitions filed by RRL and CPL on February 10, 2026. The court recorded that provisional attachments under Section 5 of PMLA subsist for a maximum of 180 days and continue after that only if the Adjudicating Authority confirms them under Section 8.

The February 10 order maintained status quo for leases that existed on the dates of provisional attachment, but allowed RRL and CPL to renew those leases. Each renewal had to include a stated condition in the lease deed and a copy of the executed deed had to be supplied to the authorities within two weeks. The court also said proceedings before the Adjudicating Authority under Section 8(2) should be expedited.

RRL and CPL told the court that being unable to lease properties in the interim could put their existence at peril. The Enforcement Directorate, or ED, had stated on February 9, 2026 that pre-existing leases could continue until the Section 8 decision. The High Court's arrangement did not make final findings on the parties' legal contentions.

What appeals and release applications are pending for RCOM assets?

RRL appealed on May 18, 2026 to the PMLA Appellate Tribunal against the April 10 common confirmation order in relation to PAO Nos. 36 and 40. The tribunal issued notice to ED on July 28 and directed a reply within eight weeks. ED filed counter-affidavits on September 23, and the matters were adjourned on October 5 to December 2, 2026.

RCOM separately appealed the August 25, 2026 confirmation of PAO No. 19. The disclosure says that appeal is pending with the Appellate Authority, but gives no hearing date or further procedural outcome. The disclosed appeal position therefore differs: RRL's April-order challenges have stated tribunal dates, whereas the later RCOM appeal is identified only as pending.

The resolution professional, or RP, also filed I.A. No. 25 of 2026 under Sections 8(7) and 8(8) of PMLA seeking release of RCOM properties attached under PAO No. 19. The application cited an Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India circular dated November 4, 2025, issued in consultation with ED. ED filed its reply on October 29, 2026, and the application was directed to be considered on November 25.

Two further applications, I.A. Nos. 9 and 10 of 2026, seek release of RCOM, CPL and RRL properties attached under PAO Nos. 32, 36 and 40. The applications were listed on October 28, 2026, when ED sought further time to respond. They were directed to be considered on November 23, making them separate from the merits appeals over the confirmation orders.

Why are RCOM and RTL named in PMLA complaints?

RCOM and RTL were named as accused in a prosecution complaint arising from Enforcement Case Information Report No. ECIR/17/STF/2026. ED filed the complaint under Section 44 of PMLA in C.T. Case No. 46 of 2026, titled Enforcement Directorate v. Reliance Home Finance Limited & Ors, alleging offences under Sections 3 and 4 of PMLA.

The Special Court at Rouse Avenue District Court issued notice on cognizance on August 11, 2026. RCOM said its RP entered appearance and filed a vakalatnama for RCOM and RTL. At the reporting date, the matter was at scrutiny of documents filed with the complaint and arguments on cognizance, with the next hearing listed for November 25, 2026; the disclosure does not say cognizance was taken.

ED also filed a supplementary prosecution complaint dated March 27, 2026 in C.T. Case No. 20 of 2026, titled Enforcement Directorate v. Punit Narendra Gaet & Ors. That complaint also names RCOM and RTL as accused under Sections 3 and 4 of PMLA. On October 30, 2026, the Special Court directed that the accused named in the supplementary complaint be summoned on November 27.

The filing also records ED and Central Bureau of Investigation, or CBI, searches during the year ended March 31, 2026. On February 26, CBI officials took RCOM board minutes covering May 15, 2010 to February 11, 2017. On March 26, they took RTL credit-facility documents covering about 2012 to 2019 and a portable storage device containing books of account and related-party transaction data; RCOM said no material financial or operational impact was expected from that search.

Conclusion

The disclosure shows that four PMLA attachments affecting RCOM and identified subsidiary assets progressed from provisional orders to confirmed orders on April 10 and August 25, 2026. It also records two prosecution-complaint proceedings naming RCOM and RTL, while the stated stages remain cognizance-related document scrutiny in C.T. Case No. 46 and a summons direction in C.T. Case No. 20.

The next disclosed events are the November 23 consideration of I.A. Nos. 9 and 10, the November 25 hearing of I.A. No. 25 and the cognizance-stage listing in C.T. Case No. 46, and the November 27 summons date in C.T. Case No. 20. RCOM's appeal against PAO No. 19 and RRL's appeals against the April 10 confirmation order also remain pending.