Under the money-laundering probe into the Amrapali Group, a property at A-3 (New), Maharani Bagh, New Delhi — assessed at ₹54.71 crore — has been placed under provisional attachment by the Enforcement Directorate. A communiqué released by the ED on 10 October 2026 identifies Surbhaee Advertising Pvt as the registered owner of the property.
Investigators contend that funds gathered from homebuyers were channelled — both directly and by way of relatives connected to Amrapali Group Managing Director Anil Kumar Sharma — into the company as loan arrangements, with those proceeds then applied toward the property in question. Under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, the property has been formally tagged by the agency as funds believed to constitute criminal proceeds.
Described as a holding measure rather than a concluded legal outcome, the attachment carries no weight as a definitive forfeiture ruling or finding of criminal guilt.
A ruling handed down on 23 July 2019, arising from the case brought by Bikram Chatterji, addressed the matter at issue. In the Union of India proceedings, the apex court took up the situation facing Amrapali homebuyers and examined findings from a forensic audit conducted under court supervision, which put the total amount of funds allegedly redirected away from buyers at ₹5,619.47 crore. A forensic audit cited in the ED's October 2026 release put the total amount allegedly redirected at over ₹5,000 crore.
On 16 September 2026, the Supreme Court issued a direction placing enforcement-directorate asset-attachment proceedings against former Amrapali directors and promoters at the top of the agency's priority list. Figures contained in the agency's status update placed provisionally attached assets at roughly ₹283.7 crore — a fraction of the ₹5,619 crore in crime-linked proceeds traced through funds belonging to homebuyers — details that a news channel carried in its 17 September coverage.
Pending applications for the disposal of attached assets under PMLA jurisdiction were placed on a fast-track footing, with the bench pressing the agency to treat the matter without delay and calling on the relevant courts to resolve those applications at the earliest opportunity. A follow-up assessment was put on the calendar for 26 October 2026.
Three separate categories of financial irregularity were laid out in the forensic audit documentation reproduced within the 2019 Supreme Court ruling: roughly ₹100.53 crore traced to professional fees disbursed among directors, their relatives, and senior managerial staff; a further ₹842.42 crore flagged across billing entries that included commission payments; and an additional ₹321.21 crore tied to residential units whose recorded sale prices fell below what the prevailing market appeared to support. Funds moved between affiliated entities — covering deposits, advances, and transfers — were drawn into the scope of the audit as well.
Among the 27 entities that audit reviewers flagged during their examination of the materials, each was recorded as a shell organisation lacking any genuine business activity. Documented within the forensic audit were financial dealings attributed to Anil Kumar Sharma spanning equity and securities holdings put at around ₹5.96 crore, ornamental jewellery assessed at roughly ₹3.39 crore, a vehicle whose purchase price stood near ₹0.56 crore, and a set of life-insurance arrangements — alongside bank deposits totalling approximately ₹5.73 crore that arrived without traceable explanation across the two-month stretch of November and December 2016.
A ruling handed down by the Supreme Court on 23 July 2019 took up the matter of Amrapali housing developments across Noida and Greater Noida, where the Group had put forward plans to build around 42,000 residential units. Flat purchases recorded between 2010 and 2014 were made against Group marketing materials that put delivery at roughly three years from the booking date. According to the ruling, a substantial portion of purchasers had already handed over anywhere from 40 to 100 percent of the total purchase price, yet property handover had not materialised on schedule.
Registrations held by Amrapali Group entities under the real-estate regulatory framework were revoked by the Court, which also assigned responsibility for completing the stalled housing developments to the National Buildings Construction Corporation (NBCC).
A bail petition filed by Anil Kumar Sharma — stemming from FIR No. 355/2017 and rooted in allegations under Sections 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code against Ultra Home Construction Pvt — came before the Delhi High Court for determination on 3 January 2024, with the matter falling under an Economic Offences Wing probe, and a contention that a housing pledge made by Ltd. was never carried through. Bail was extended to the accused after the bench weighed the time already spent in detention, the submission of the charge sheet, and how far along the matter had progressed — while making clear that nothing in its reasoning amounted to a ruling on the underlying merits.
A bail petition lodged by Sharma — referencing FIR No. 139/2019 and encompassing allegations of cheating, criminal breach of trust, and criminal conspiracy in connection with the Amrapali Adarsh Awas Yojana project — came before the Delhi High Court on 25 January 2024, where it was rejected through an order that operated independently of the other proceedings tied to the case. According to the prosecution's account, the complainant handed over roughly ₹12.82 lakh for a flat listed on the 34th floor of a building whose approved plans reportedly covered only up to the 29th floor, with the project absent from the Uttar Pradesh Real Estate Regulatory Authority's register and handover of the unit never having taken place. Seventeen additional complaints were placed before the bench, which went on to determine that the threshold for regular bail had not been met at that point in proceedings — a finding expressly limited to the bail application itself.
Forensic audit figures placed before the Supreme Court bench in September 2026 by lawyers acting for homebuyers — drawing on reporting from a news outlet — showed that recoveries against the total outstanding sum of ₹5,619.47 crore had reached only around ₹744.81 crore, while amounts still traceable to Amrapali promoters and directors stood at upwards of ₹2,159 crore, with a further sum exceeding ₹1,200 crore potentially realisable from third-party entities linked to the group. According to that document, 74 properties in Indore carrying no encumbrances had been flagged by the ED as candidates for disposal, with a formal application on the matter awaiting adjudication before the Special PMLA Court.
Pending sale applications before PMLA courts drew an order from the Supreme Court calling for those matters to be resolved without unnecessary delay. Figures placed before the September 2026 hearing indicated that while roughly 33,250 units had been built and keys handed over to some 22,350 purchasers, a further 10,900 buyers remained without possession of their properties.
No conviction under the Amrapali-related PMLA proceedings had been recorded against Anil Kumar Sharma in any publicly available documentation as at 16 October 2026. Court filings from the September 2026 session placed the money-laundering case among matters still awaiting adjudication. Those facing charges carry a legal presumption of innocence that holds firm until a court of law determines otherwise.
