GURUGRAM: The Enforcement Directorate filed a prosecution complaint on Friday, November 6, 2026, against Raheja Developers and members of its promoter family in a money laundering case linked to homebuyer payments in Gurugram and Delhi, according to two reports describing the agency's statement. The projects named in the case include Raheja Revanta, which the developer locates in Sector 78, Gurugram.

The complaint was filed before the special court dealing with Prevention of Money Laundering Act cases at Saket in New Delhi. It brings the agency's allegations before the court. It is a prosecution filing, and the reported claims about diversion of funds have not been presented as a finding of guilt against the company or the individuals named.

What the agency alleges about buyer payments

According to the agency's account carried in the reports, the company collected approximately Rs 2,699 crore from about 4,600 buyers and investors across residential and commercial projects in Delhi and Gurugram. Those are combined figures for the two locations. They should not be read as a count of Gurugram buyers alone or as money collected exclusively for the Sector 78 project.

The ED says it has identified Rs 1,353.26 crore as alleged proceeds of crime. Its account separates that amount into Rs 1,175.86 crore allegedly removed from project, escrow and RERA accounts for purposes other than construction, and Rs 177.40 crore allegedly received in cash outside registered agreements. These remain the investigating agency's allegations about how payments were handled.

The investigation followed police cases registered by the Economic Offences Wing of Delhi Police and Gurugram Police after complaints from purchasers. According to the reported agency statement, buyers had paid for flats or commercial units but had received neither possession nor refunds. The projects mentioned include Revanta, Atlantis, Navin Minar and The Delhi Mall. The filing concerns a group of projects rather than a single housing development.

  • New development: prosecution complaint filed on November 6, 2026.
  • Court: special PMLA court at Saket, New Delhi.
  • Locations covered by the reported buyer figures: Delhi and Gurugram.
  • Alleged proceeds of crime identified by the ED: Rs 1,353.26 crore.
  • Current market value of properties for which confiscation is sought: Rs 2,399.65 crore.

Assets and the people named in the complaint

The reported complaint names Raheja Developers, managing director Navin Raheja, his son Nayan Raheja, daughter Nayana Singhania and wife Nirmal Raheja, along with other people and entities. The agency alleges that buyer money was routed to group companies and companies operated through employees and relatives acting as nominee directors. It also alleges that money was used to acquire land and transferred between project accounts.

The ED has sought confiscation of attached properties with a stated current market value of Rs 2,399.65 crore. A request for confiscation is distinct from a completed confiscation ordered by the court. The agency's publicly accessible release register also carries earlier Raheja attachment updates, including a July 31 entry giving the cumulative attachment value at approximately the same amount.

The official ED release section provides the agency's public record of announcements. Its explanation of its statutory functions describes investigation, provisional attachment, prosecution and confiscation by a special court as parts of its PMLA mandate. These are separate stages of the process, with judicial proceedings determining the outcome of a prosecution.

Earlier bail decisions and the limits of this update

The reports also say Nayan Raheja's anticipatory bail plea was rejected by the special court in September and by the Delhi High Court in October. Those earlier procedural decisions provide context for the November 6 filing. They do not establish the truth of every allegation in the prosecution complaint or determine the eventual result of the money laundering case.

The agency alleges that the four family members did not join search proceedings or comply with summonses. That account is attributed to the investigating agency. This update does not report a new arrest, a conviction, a possession handover or a refund order for individual purchasers. None of those outcomes follows automatically from the filing described in the reports.

For separate local regulatory background, the site has reported on changes to RERA hearing dates, project objection notices and an interim court order concerning Enigma power supply. Those proceedings are distinct from the prosecution complaint now filed in the Raheja case.