NCLT Mumbai Refuses to Drop Bawa Family Members from IL&FS Proceedings, Cites Fund Transfers and SFIO Findings

April 7, 2026 : The Mumbai Bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) has dismissed an application filed by Asha Kiran Bawa and Akansha Bawa seeking deletion of their names from the ongoing IL&FS proceedings initiated by the Union of India under Sections 241–242 of the Companies Act, 2013. The Tribunal held that they remain necessary parties in light of material indicating substantial fund transfers and their involvement in related entities.

The application (CA 229 of 2025) arose in Company Petition No. 3638 of 2018 concerning Infrastructure Leasing & Financial Services Ltd.. The applicants, impleaded as Respondent Nos. 319 and 320, had sought removal from the proceedings, vacation of restraint orders, and release of their movable and immovable assets. They argued that no violations were established against them and that no reliefs were pursued against them in the SFIO complaint.

The Bench comprising Judicial Member Sushil Mahadeorao Kochey and Technical Member Prabhat Kumar noted that the applicants were impleaded in 2019 based on material showing transfer of funds from Ramesh C. Bawa to them, along with operation of lockers despite restraint orders. It was recorded that ₹4.84 crore was transferred to Akansha Bawa and ₹27.67 crore to Asha Kiran Bawa, and that these funds were subsequently routed through companies in which they were directors.

Rejecting the applicants’ reliance on a 2025 contempt order, the Tribunal clarified that their impleadment was not based solely on contempt allegations but also on financial transactions and their role in related corporate entities. These factors, the Bench held, continue to be relevant for proper adjudication.

The Tribunal also examined extracts from the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) report. It noted that the applicants were directors in AAAB Infrastructure Private Limited and that the investigation referred to transactions involving borrower groups of IFIN. The report further indicated that investments were routed through front entities into landholding companies linked to borrowers whose loans were allegedly evergreened.

Finding no merit in the contention that there were no adverse findings against the applicants, the Tribunal concluded that their presence was necessary given the broader allegations surrounding fund diversion in the IL&FS matter.

Accordingly, the application was dismissed.

Case Title: Asha Kiran Bawa & Anr. v. Union of India
Case No.: CA 229 of 2025
Coram: Sushil Mahadeorao Kochey (Judicial Member), Prabhat Kumar (Technical Member)