NEW DELHI: Law enforcement agencies are probing the 2017 assignment of a Rs 600-crore Yes Bank loan to Suraksha ARC-11 Trust over allegations that the account was transferred despite never being classified as a non-performing asset (NPA) before the assignment.
The transaction is also under the scanner of the Enforcement Directorate (ED), which earlier conducted raids at 17 locations in Mumbai and Delhi under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act in connection with an alleged loan diversion case involving Housing Development and Infrastructure Limited (HDIL) and associated companies.
The premises searched included the offices of Suraksha Asset Reconstruction Company Ltd (SARCL), Suraksha Realty Ltd, Khyati Realtors Pvt Ltd and other linked entities. Suraksha ARC promoter Sudhir Valia is currently in judicial custody.
Rakesh Kumar Wadhawan, promoter of HDIL and suspended director of Privilege Power and Infrastructure Pvt Ltd (PPIPL), filed a fresh complaint with the Mumbai Economic Offences Wing (EOW) on Thursday, following which the agency began a probe.
According to the complaint, PPIPL had taken the loan from Yes Bank's Nehru Centre branch in Worli for an affordable housing project in Virar (East). The loan was secured against land and receivables valued at over Rs 2,000 crore.
The complaint alleges that the 48-month contractual moratorium was still in force when the loan was assigned on March 31, 2017. It claims PPIPL had made substantial repayments, including interest, and was never served any notice regarding NPA classification or given an opportunity to challenge such a classification.
The complaint states that Yes Bank assigned the loan to Suraksha ARC-11 Trust for Rs 155.27 crore against total dues of about Rs 213.6 crore. It alleges the bank received only Rs 23.3 crore in cash, while the remaining Rs 131.98 crore was paid through security receipts held by Yes Bank itself.
Citing a 2019 internal review by Yes Bank, the complaint alleges the cash component moved through a chain of entities, raising suspicions of round-tripping. It further alleges that Yes Bank's own funding may have been used through related entities to finance the acquisition of PPIPL's loan account.
The complaint also questions the absence of an independent valuation of the secured assets, a transparent price-discovery process and competitive bidding before the assignment. It says the board resolution approving the sale was passed just a day before the assignment agreement.
It further alleges irregularities in PPIPL's ongoing insolvency proceedings, claiming Suraksha ARC's voting share in the Committee of Creditors was inflated from 23.39% to 35.99%. It also raises allegations of conflict of interest involving former Yes Bank director Rama Subramaniam Gandhi.
The complaint refers to a June 18, 2026 order of a Mumbai sessions court rejecting Sudhir Valia's anticipatory bail in a related case involving Sapphire Land Development Pvt Ltd. The court observed that there was a prima facie case suggesting officials of Yes Bank and Suraksha ARC acted in collusion and that forged records were allegedly created.
The complaint has sought an investigation into former Yes Bank managing director Rana Kapoor, Sudhir Valia, Hitesh Darji and other officials named in the matter.