Kerala Police have registered a criminal case against GLAS Trust Company LLC and others over allegations that a forged lender-authorisation document was used in the insolvency proceedings of Think & Learn Private Limited, the parent company of BYJU’S. The FIR concerns a Direction Letter dated July 25, 2024, which was relied upon to establish GLAS Trust’s authority to represent lenders during the insolvency process.
The case follows a complaint by Rajendran Vellappalath, managing director of Voizzit Technology Private Limited. The complainant alleges that the disputed document contained reused signatures and altered lender details, and helped support a claim of approximately ₹11,432.98 crore and 99.41% voting rights in the committee of creditors. These are allegations that remain subject to police investigation and judicial scrutiny; the FIR does not establish that forgery or criminal wrongdoing took place.
Kerala Police Register FIR Against GLAS Trust
The FIR was registered on October 20, 2026, at Palarivattom Police Station in Ernakulam, Kerala. It names GLAS Trust Company LLC and other individuals and entities in connection with the alleged fabrication and use of the lender-authorisation letter.
The case invokes provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), including:
| BNS provision | Subject |
|---|---|
| Section 318(4) | Cheating involving delivery of property or valuable security |
| Section 336(3) | Forgery for the purpose of cheating |
| Section 340(2) | Using a forged document or electronic record as genuine |
| Section 61 | Criminal conspiracy |
| Section 3(5) | Joint liability for criminal acts committed by several persons in furtherance of common intention |
The complaint was filed by Rajendran Vellappalath, who is also associated with the Voizzit entities involved in related proceedings before the Kerala High Court.
The police investigation will examine the disputed document, how it was prepared, whether it was altered and how it was used in the insolvency proceedings. Registration of the FIR is the beginning of a criminal investigation, not a finding of guilt.
What Is the Alleged Forgery in the GLAS Trust Letter?
The central issue concerns a Direction Letter dated July 25, 2024. GLAS Trust relied on this document to establish its authority to act on behalf of certain lenders in BYJU’S insolvency proceedings.
According to the complainant’s submissions in a review petition before the Kerala High Court, the July 2024 letter allegedly reused signature pages from an earlier Direction Letter dated January 18, 2024.
The petitioners have raised several questions about the document’s authenticity:
- Reused signatures: Signature pages from the January 18 letter were allegedly incorporated into the July 25 document.
- Altered information: The petitioners allege that lender names, dates and loan amounts were changed while the underlying signatures remained the same.
- Electronic comments: Certain amounts were allegedly inserted as comments in the electronic document rather than appearing on the signed pages.
- Copied signature images: The complaint alleges that signature images were copied across multiple pages.
- Document format: The petitioners contend that the final document was assembled as a Word file and converted into a PDF rather than being an electronically signed document.
The petitioners have sought examination of the original electronic files and related communications to establish the document’s origin and authenticity. They have also sought forensic examination of the disputed material.
These claims are based on the petitioners’ account and have not been established through a final forensic report or judicial finding.
Why the Direction Letter Matters to BYJU’S Insolvency
The disputed letter is important because it relates to GLAS Trust’s authority to represent lenders and exercise voting rights in the committee of creditors (CoC).
The petitioners contend that GLAS Trust needed authorisation from lenders representing more than 50% of the relevant loan exposure to act on their behalf.
According to their submissions, the disputed document was used to support recognition of a lender claim of approximately ₹11,432.98 crore and a 99.41% voting share in the creditors’ committee on August 21, 2024.
The petitioners further argue that removing the disputed signature pages would reduce the claimed lender support from approximately 95% to around 42%. They say this could raise questions about whether GLAS Trust had sufficient authority to represent the lenders.
The significance of this dispute extends beyond the authenticity of one document. The lender mandate and the resulting voting rights are relevant to decisions taken during the insolvency process.
However, the figures and the claimed effect of excluding the disputed pages are part of the petitioners’ case. Their legal and financial implications will depend on the evidence and decisions of the competent authorities.
Kerala High Court Admits Review Petition but Refuses to Halt Insolvency
The police case is unfolding alongside proceedings before the Kerala High Court.
On October 27, 2026, a Division Bench admitted a review petition filed by Voizzit Technology Private Limited and Voizzit Information Technology LLC. The petition seeks reconsideration of an earlier judgment dated June 12, 2026, which had dismissed their request for investigations by central agencies into alleged irregularities in BYJU’S insolvency proceedings.
The petitioners say they discovered fresh electronic evidence concerning the July 25, 2024 Direction Letter after the earlier proceedings. They have asked the court to examine the new material and consider their requests for investigations by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), Enforcement Directorate (ED) and National Investigation Agency (NIA).
They have also sought interim protection, including a halt to the corporate insolvency resolution process (CIRP), restrictions on asset sales and safeguards against transfers of company assets.
The High Court, however, declined to stay the insolvency proceedings while admitting the review petition.
This distinction is important: the court’s decision to admit the review means it will consider the petition. It does not mean that the court has accepted the forgery allegations as proven.
How BYJU’S Entered Insolvency
BYJU’S parent company, Think & Learn Private Limited, entered corporate insolvency proceedings in July 2024 after the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) approached the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) over unpaid sponsorship dues.
The dispute involved approximately ₹158.9 crore in payments relating to a sponsorship agreement.
The insolvency process briefly appeared to be nearing a different outcome when the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) approved a settlement between the company and the BCCI in August 2024. The order brought the insolvency proceedings to a halt.
However, GLAS Trust challenged the settlement. In October 2024, the Supreme Court of India set aside the NCLAT order, restoring the insolvency proceedings.
GLAS Trust represents lenders involved in a separate financing dispute with BYJU’S. Its role in representing those lenders and its position in the creditors’ committee have been contested during the insolvency process.
The current Kerala Police FIR adds a new criminal investigation to an already complex dispute involving the company’s lenders, insolvency professionals, former management and other parties.
A Separate Layer of Legal Disputes
The latest FIR should not be confused with an earlier criminal complaint filed by BYJU’S founder Byju Raveendran in April 2025.
That earlier case involved allegations against the former resolution professional, GLAS Trust and certain EY personnel over their roles in the insolvency process. The allegations and parties involved in that complaint are distinct from the new Kerala FIR concerning the July 2024 Direction Letter.
BYJU’S insolvency has also involved disputes over lender claims, the appointment of insolvency professionals and the handling of company assets. The various complaints and court proceedings must be assessed separately rather than treated as proof of a single established conspiracy.
The Bigger Picture
The latest case highlights how questions about creditor representation and document authenticity can affect high-value corporate insolvency proceedings. In a process where voting rights determine important decisions about a distressed company, the validity of lender authorisations can have significant consequences for creditors and other stakeholders.
The allegations also raise broader questions about the verification of electronic documents, signatures and lender mandates in insolvency cases. A police investigation and any subsequent forensic examination may help establish how the disputed letter was created and used. Until then, the claims remain allegations rather than proven misconduct.
Looking Ahead
The immediate focus will be on the Kerala Police investigation, the examination of the disputed electronic files and the proceedings in the Kerala High Court review petition. Investigators will need to establish the document’s provenance, identify any alterations and determine whether the evidence supports the criminal allegations.
The insolvency proceedings of Think & Learn will continue unless a competent court orders otherwise. The outcome of the investigation and the court’s consideration of the review petition could influence the wider dispute over GLAS Trust’s authority, but neither the FIR nor the admission of the review petition has, by itself, changed the legal status of the allegations.
Get the day’s top stories in your inbox
One concise email. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.
