SBI Term Loan: RLLR: 8.15 | 7.25% - 8.45%
Canara Bank: RLLR: 8 | 7.15% - 10%
ICICI Bank: RLLR: -- | 8.5% - 9.65%
Punjab & Sind Bank: RLLR: 7.3 | 7.3% - 10.7%
Bank of Baroda: RLLR: 7.9 | 7.2% - 8.95%
Federal Bank: RLLR: -- | 8.75% - 10%
IndusInd Bank: RLLR: -- | 7.5% - 9.75%
Bank of Maharashtra: RLLR: 8.05 | 7.1% - 9.15%
Yes Bank: RLLR: -- | 7.4% - 10.54%
Karur Vysya Bank: RLLR: 8.8 | 8.5% - 10.65%

CBI books Ozone Projects, bank officials in homebuyer fraud case

#Law & Policy#India
Last Updated : 18th Apr, 2026
Synopsis

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has registered a case against Ozone Projects Pvt Ltd, its executives and bank officials in connection with alleged corruption and cheating of homebuyers under a subvention scheme. The action follows directions from the Supreme Court as part of a wider probe into a builder bank nexus. The case pertains to projects where home loans were allegedly disbursed in buyers names, with developers failing to service pre-EMIs as agreed. The development is part of a broader crackdown, with multiple FIRs and searches across states targeting similar practices. The investigation focuses on fund diversion, regulatory violations and financial irregularities affecting homebuyers.

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has registered a case against Ozone Projects Pvt Ltd, its former executives and officials of lending institutions in the past week, in connection with alleged corruption and cheating of homebuyers under housing loan arrangements linked to the company's projects.


The action forms part of a wider probe into an alleged nexus between real estate developers and financial institutions, initiated following directions from the Supreme Court. The investigation pertains to alleged irregularities in loan disbursals and violations of subvention schemes, under which developers are required to service equated monthly instalments (EMIs) on behalf of homebuyers until possession is handed over.

According to officials, the case relates to projects where loans were sanctioned and disbursed in the names of prospective homebuyers, with funds allegedly routed to the developer in violation of regulatory norms. The agency is examining whether there was a coordinated arrangement involving company officials and bank representatives to facilitate these transactions.

Investigative inputs indicate that the developer is alleged to have defaulted on pre-EMI obligations under tripartite agreements, resulting in financial liability shifting to homebuyers. Such defaults are being examined as part of the alleged cheating and financial misconduct under the case.

The project under scrutiny was launched with commitments on timelines and delivery schedules; however, possession was delayed, with buyers raising concerns over both construction progress and financial exposure. The company is also undergoing insolvency proceedings, adding complexity to the resolution of claims and liabilities linked to the project.

The FIR is part of a larger set of cases being investigated by the agency across multiple states, targeting alleged misuse of subvention schemes and financial arrangements between developers and lenders. The Supreme Court had earlier directed the CBI to register multiple cases and proceed with investigations without preliminary inquiry, following petitions filed by affected homebuyers.

Officials indicated that the probe will focus on tracing fund flows, identifying the role of intermediary entities and determining whether regulatory guidelines issued by institutions such as the Reserve Bank of India and National Housing Bank were violated.

The investigation is also expected to examine the involvement of bank officials in sanctioning and disbursing loans, particularly in cases where due diligence processes may have been bypassed or inadequately followed.

The development reflects increased regulatory scrutiny of financial practices within the housing sector, especially in relation to subvention-linked projects that have led to disputes and financial stress for homebuyers. Authorities have indicated that further action may follow as evidence is examined and additional parties are identified in the course of the investigation.

Have something to say? Post your comment