The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has registered a case against Gensol Engineering, its electric-vehicle leasing subsidiary Gensol EV Lease and BluSmart co-founders Anmol Singh Jaggi and Puneet Singh Jaggi over allegations linked to the diversion of loans extended by the Indian Renewable Energy Development Agency (IREDA). The case concerns an alleged financial loss of more than ₹672 crore to the state-run renewable-energy financier.
The FIR follows a complaint from IREDA and alleges that loans sanctioned for purchasing electric vehicles for BluSmart’s ride-hailing operations were diverted or used for purposes other than those approved. According to the complaint, the alleged loss comprises ₹453.77 crore linked to Gensol Engineering and ₹218.97 crore linked to Gensol EV Lease, excluding interest and other applicable charges. The allegations have not been adjudicated, and the accused are entitled to due process.
CBI Registers Case Over IREDA Loan Diversion
The CBI’s latest action represents a major escalation in the long-running financial and governance controversy surrounding Gensol and BluSmart.
The case names Gensol Engineering, Gensol EV Lease and the two Jaggi brothers. The FIR was registered following IREDA’s complaint, with the agency alleging that funds extended for specific purposes were allegedly misappropriated and diverted.
The alleged diversion is particularly significant because IREDA is a government-backed financial institution whose lending is focused on renewable-energy and clean-energy projects.
Key Numbers In The CBI Case
| Particular | Reported Figure |
|---|---|
| Total alleged IREDA loss | ₹672.74 crore |
| Alleged loss linked to Gensol Engineering | ₹453.77 crore |
| Alleged loss linked to Gensol EV Lease | ₹218.97 crore |
| Interest and other charges | Excluded from above figures |
| Main lender | IREDA |
| CBI case | Registered |
| Main individuals named | Anmol Singh Jaggi and Puneet Singh Jaggi |
| Companies named | Gensol Engineering and Gensol EV Lease |
| Purpose of loans | EV procurement and related approved projects |
The ₹672.74 crore figure is the combined amount reported by IREDA for the two loan accounts. IREDA had already classified both accounts as fraud and reported them to the Reserve Bank of India in July.
How The Alleged Diversion Took Place
According to IREDA’s complaint, loans were provided to Gensol Engineering and Gensol EV Lease for purchasing electric vehicles intended for BluSmart’s ride-hailing fleet.
The allegations centre on the use of those funds for purposes other than those for which the loans had been sanctioned.
The CBI case therefore goes beyond a conventional repayment default. The central allegation is that sanctioned loan money was allegedly diverted, resulting in financial losses for the lender.
Alleged Flow Of Funds
IREDA
↓
Loans To Gensol / Gensol EV Lease
↓
Funds Intended For EV Procurement
↓
BluSmart Fleet Expansion
↓
Alleged Diversion / Related-Party Transactions
↓
IREDA's Reported Financial Loss
The investigation will determine the precise flow of funds, the entities involved and whether the alleged transactions amounted to criminal offences.
IREDA Had Already Declared The Accounts Fraud
The CBI case follows an earlier decision by IREDA.
In July 2026, IREDA declared the loan accounts of Gensol Engineering and Gensol EV Lease as fraud and reported the matter to the RBI. Gensol subsequently informed the stock exchanges that IREDA had issued an order dated July 9 declaring its loan accounts as fraud.
The combined outstanding exposure was ₹672.74 crore.
IREDA Exposure
| Borrower | Outstanding Amount |
|---|---|
| Gensol Engineering | ₹453.77 crore |
| Gensol EV Lease | ₹218.97 crore |
| Total | ₹672.74 crore |
IREDA’s annual-report disclosures also show that the lender had previously recalled loans and initiated insolvency proceedings against Gensol Engineering and Gensol EV Lease. The NCLT admitted the insolvency applications in June 2025 and appointed an interim resolution professional.
Earlier IREDA Complaint Raised Falsification Concerns
The latest CBI case is part of a much wider sequence of regulatory actions.
In April 2025, IREDA said it had filed a complaint with the Economic Offences Wing after identifying concerns involving falsified documents and promoter shareholding dilution without lender approval.
IREDA specifically said that letters referred to by credit-rating agencies as having been issued by IREDA were not issued by the agency.
The issue had also surfaced in SEBI’s investigation into Gensol.
Timeline Of The Gensol-Issue
| Date / Period | Development |
|---|---|
| April 2025 | IREDA files EOW complaint |
| April 2025 | SEBI issues interim order amid investigation |
| June 2025 | NCLT admits insolvency proceedings |
| January 2026 | ED attaches assets and bank balances in PMLA case |
| July 2026 | IREDA declares loan accounts as fraud |
| July 31, 2026 | CBI FIR registered, according to reports |
| August 2026 | CBI action becomes public |
The sequence shows how the matter has moved through several regulatory and investigative channels.
SEBI Had Earlier Flagged Alleged Falsified Documents
SEBI’s 2025 proceedings provide important context for the latest CBI action.
The regulator said credit-rating agencies had reported that Gensol submitted conduct letters purportedly issued by IREDA and Power Finance Corporation. Those lenders denied issuing the letters, according to SEBI’s order.
The documents reportedly indicated that Gensol was regular in servicing its debt.
SEBI’s investigation also examined the company’s debt servicing, liquidity position and the use of funds raised through loans.
Regulatory Concerns Previously Reported
| Area | Concern Raised |
|---|---|
| Loan servicing | Delays and financial stress |
| Lender documents | Purported letters denied by lenders |
| Credit ratings | Downgrades to ‘D’ reported |
| Promoter shareholding | Dilution without lender approval alleged by IREDA |
| Loan utilisation | Alleged diversion of funds |
| Corporate governance | Questions raised by regulators |
These earlier findings do not establish the criminal allegations in the new CBI case, but they form part of the regulatory history surrounding Gensol.
ED Had Also Investigated The Group
The Enforcement Directorate separately investigated the Gensol group under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act.
In January 2026, the ED said its investigation found that Gensol and associated entities allegedly diverted public funds received as loans from IREDA and PFC, as well as financing from Toyota Financial Services India, through a network of transactions.
The agency said it provisionally attached an apartment at DLF Camellias in Gurugram worth ₹40.57 crore and bank balances totalling ₹14.28 crore.
The ED also stated that the outstanding amount of Gensol Engineering from IREDA and PFC loans was ₹505.27 crore as of December 2025.
ED Attachment Details
| Asset / Amount | Reported Value |
|---|---|
| DLF Camellias apartment | ₹40.57 crore |
| Bank balances attached | ₹14.28 crore |
| Total specified attachment | ₹54.85 crore |
| Gensol IREDA + PFC outstanding as of Dec. 2025 | ₹505.27 crore |
The ED investigation is separate from the CBI case, although both involve allegations concerning the use of loan funds.
Why BluSmart Is Central To The Case
BluSmart is important to the case because the EV loans were linked to the expansion of its electric taxi fleet.
Gensol’s business relationship with BluSmart placed the two businesses closely together, while Anmol Singh Jaggi was associated with both companies.
The collapse of BluSmart’s operations subsequently exposed deeper financial problems surrounding the group and its financing arrangements.
The CBI’s investigation will now have to establish how funds intended for EV purchases were ultimately used and whether any transfers involved related entities or other businesses connected to the promoters.
Gensol Is Already In Insolvency Proceedings
The latest CBI development comes while Gensol Engineering is already undergoing a corporate insolvency resolution process.
Gensol informed the NSE in July that the NCLT had initiated the CIRP in June 2025 and that a resolution professional had taken over the company’s business operations.
IREDA has also pursued recovery through insolvency and debt-recovery proceedings.
Gensol’s Legal And Financial Exposure
| Process / Action | Status |
|---|---|
| NCLT insolvency proceedings | Initiated |
| IREDA loan accounts | Declared fraud |
| RBI reporting | Made by IREDA |
| EOW complaint | Filed earlier |
| SEBI proceedings | Regulatory action/investigation |
| ED investigation | PMLA proceedings |
| CBI FIR | Registered |
| Debt recovery | Pursued by IREDA |
The accumulation of proceedings makes recovery of public and institutional funds a central issue alongside criminal investigation.
What The CBI Investigation Will Examine
The CBI investigation is expected to focus on the alleged movement and use of IREDA funds.
Investigators will need to establish whether the funds were transferred to entities outside the sanctioned purpose, whether documentation was falsified and whether the transactions were part of a coordinated arrangement.
The agency will also need to establish individual responsibility.
Key Questions For Investigators
| Question | Why It Matters |
|---|---|
| Where did the loan funds go? | Establishes the alleged diversion trail |
| Who authorised the transfers? | Helps determine individual responsibility |
| Were EVs purchased as sanctioned? | Tests compliance with loan conditions |
| Were related entities involved? | Could establish potential conflicts |
| Were documents falsified? | Relevant to forgery allegations |
| What was the ultimate use of funds? | Determines alleged financial benefit |
| How much can be recovered? | Important for IREDA and creditors |
A CBI FIR marks the beginning of a criminal investigation, not a finding of guilt.
Impact On Credit And Renewable-Energy Financing
The case also raises broader questions for India’s renewable-energy financing ecosystem.
IREDA is a major public-sector financier of renewable-energy projects. Allegations involving diversion of funds can increase scrutiny of borrower due diligence, end-use monitoring and documentation verification.
Financial institutions may respond by strengthening checks around disbursement and tracking of project funds, particularly where loans involve related businesses or rapidly growing clean-mobility ventures.
Potential Industry Impact
| Area | Potential Effect |
|---|---|
| Lenders | Greater scrutiny of loan utilisation |
| EV financing | Tighter end-use monitoring |
| Renewable-energy finance | Stronger borrower due diligence |
| Credit ratings | Greater verification of lender documents |
| Startups | More emphasis on financial governance |
| Investors | Increased focus on related-party transactions |
| Public-sector lenders | Greater recovery and monitoring pressure |
The case could therefore have implications beyond Gensol and BluSmart if lenders reassess how they monitor financing provided to emerging clean-energy companies.
The Bigger Picture
The CBI’s FIR marks another major escalation in the Gensol-BluSmart controversy, which has already involved IREDA, SEBI, the ED, insolvency proceedings and earlier police investigations. The latest case centres on IREDA’s allegation that ₹672.74 crore of outstanding loans involving Gensol Engineering and Gensol EV Lease were subject to misuse or diversion.
For India’s clean-energy and EV financing ecosystem, the case highlights the importance of strong controls over how borrowed funds are used. The investigation will now have to establish the complete transaction trail and determine individual and corporate liability. Until that process is completed, the allegations against the promoters and companies remain allegations rather than proven criminal conduct.
Looking Ahead
The CBI investigation is likely to focus on tracing the IREDA loan proceeds, examining transactions involving related entities and determining whether the alleged diversion and documentation irregularities amount to offences under criminal law. The investigation could also intersect with information gathered during earlier SEBI, ED and EOW proceedings, potentially giving investigators a broader picture of the financial transactions under scrutiny.
For IREDA and other creditors, recovery remains a parallel priority. Gensol is already in insolvency proceedings, while IREDA has pursued recovery through legal channels. The outcome of the CBI investigation, the insolvency process and the various regulatory proceedings will determine how much of the alleged exposure can ultimately be recovered and what further action may be taken against the companies and individuals involved.
Get the day’s top stories in your inbox
One concise email. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.
