PNB Fraud Case: Mumbai Court Rejects Purvi Mehta’s Video Plea, Says She Must Appear Before Investigators
A Mumbai special CBI court has ruled that Purvi Mehta must appear in person before investigators in the Nirav Modi-PNB fraud case, rejecting her request to participate through video conferencing.
Mumbai, August 11, 2026:A special CBI court in Mumbai has rejected Purvi Mehta’s request to appear through video conferencing in the Punjab National Bank (PNB) fraud case linked to businessman Nirav Modi.
The court ruled that Mehta’s physical presence in India is necessary because investigators need to question her in detail about financial records, bank accounts, transactions and other documents connected with the alleged fraud.
Special CBI Judge S.K. Karhale said that Mehta is a proposed accused and not merely a witness or approver in the case. The court observed that questioning involving a large volume of financial documents and transactions could not be effectively carried out through video conferencing.
Court says physical questioning is necessary
While rejecting Mehta’s application, the court said investigators needed the opportunity to confront her with various documents, account entries and financial transactions.
According to the court, such detailed interrogation is particularly important in a serious financial crime case and may not be possible through a virtual hearing.
The court also made it clear that allowing a person to participate through video conferencing cannot become a way of avoiding physical appearance before Indian authorities.
Court questions why Mehta has not returned to India
The court also raised concerns over Mehta’s conduct and her failure to appear before Indian investigative agencies.
The order noted that Mehta had previously been made an approver in a money-laundering case registered by the Enforcement Directorate against Nirav Modi. Her status as an approver was linked to conditions that included returning to India, appearing before the court and cooperating with the legal proceedings.
However, the court noted that she had not appeared before the authorities.
Mehta had cited the COVID-19 pandemic as one of the reasons for her inability to travel to India. The court, however, observed that the pandemic-related restrictions had ended years ago and said there had been no genuine effort on her part to return to India afterwards.
The court questioned why she had continued to remain outside the country for several years despite the legal proceedings.
CBI opposed her video-conferencing request
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) strongly opposed Mehta’s request to have her statement recorded through video conferencing.
The CBI had filed a third supplementary chargesheet against Mehta in March last year in connection with the PNB fraud case. The chargesheet is yet to be taken cognisance of by the court.
Mehta had subsequently sought to become an approver in the case and requested that her statement be recorded virtually.
Her legal team argued that she was willing to cooperate with the investigation and that modern technology should allow her statement to be recorded through video conferencing.
However, the prosecution argued that Mehta’s physical presence was required because of her alleged role in the financial transactions under investigation.
The CBI also maintained that video conferencing is an enabling facility and cannot be claimed as an absolute legal right by an accused or proposed accused.
Court rejects the argument of a “progressive approach”
The defence had argued that the investigative agency should adopt a more progressive and technology-friendly approach by allowing Mehta to participate remotely.
The court acknowledged that modern technology can be useful in legal proceedings but said that technological convenience cannot override the requirements of an investigation into a serious alleged financial crime.
The judge observed that no accused or proposed accused should be permitted to use the idea of a “progressive approach” as a means of avoiding an investigation.
The court concluded that Mehta’s physical presence before the investigating officer was necessary for recording her statement and carrying out the required questioning.
What the case involves
The case is connected to the massive PNB fraud case involving Nirav Modi, in which investigators have been examining alleged financial irregularities and transactions involving Punjab National Bank.
The investigation involves a large volume of financial documents, banking records and transactions. Investigators have also been examining the alleged roles of individuals connected with the case.
The latest court order does not decide Mehta’s guilt or innocence. Instead, it concerns how and under what circumstances she must participate in the investigation.
For now, the Mumbai special CBI court has made its position clear: Mehta cannot insist on giving her statement through video conferencing and must appear physically before the investigating authorities.
The court’s decision comes as the CBI continues its investigation into the alleged PNB fraud and examines the roles of people connected to the case
News source: Information for this article was gathered from a variety of reliable news outlets.
