SFIO officer: CBI arrests three over alleged bribe demand

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) says it has arrested a deputy director-level officer of the Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO), a Delhi-based advocate and another private person over an alleged Rs 1 crore bribe demand linked to SFIO’s DHFL investigation in Chennai. The agency said the arrests followed the advocate’s receipt of Rs 20 lakh as part payment on behalf of the officer.^[1]

The Times of India reported the arrests on 15 October 2026, identifying the officer as Harish Kumar Tanwar, a 2017-batch Indian Revenue Service officer posted as SFIO deputy director in Chennai. It named the advocate as Bharat Sharma and the third person as Aryan Sharma, described as the advocate’s relative. The CBI statement does not name the three arrested people or specify the arrest date.^[2][1]

According to the CBI, the demand was made to favour the complainant in an investigation concerning Dewan Housing Finance Corporation Limited, or DHFL. The corruption allegation concerns the handling of that investigation; it is not a finding against the arrested people in the underlying DHFL case.^[1]

The alleged payment and the trap

The CBI said it verified the complaint and registered a First Information Report (FIR), the initial police record of the alleged offence, before laying a trap. Its account places the advocate at the point of receipt: he allegedly accepted Rs 20 lakh from the complainant for the SFIO officer. The agency described that sum as part of the Rs 1 crore demand, not the full amount sought.^[1]

The agency also searched premises associated with the public servant and the advocate. It said material connected with the case had been recovered, describing it as incriminating, but did not identify the documents or other items in its statement. It also did not explain the alleged role of the third arrested person.^[1]

The Times of India reported that the case was registered under Section 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, concerning criminal conspiracy, and Sections 7 and 7A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. These provisions were reported as the basis of the case, not as offences established by a court.^[2]

There is a material difference between accounts of the trap. ThePrint, citing unnamed agency and security-establishment sources, reported that an SFIO inspector was caught accepting Rs 20 lakh and that investigators subsequently arrested the senior officer. It also reported allegations that a private company executive had been threatened with arrest and prosecution if he did not pay.^[3]

The CBI statement instead identifies an advocate as the recipient and describes the arrests as involving one SFIO officer and two private people. The Times of India’s account follows that description. Neither explains the difference with ThePrint’s report, so the inspector account cannot be treated as an established additional arrest or combined with the agency’s version into a single sequence.^[1][2][3]

DHFL inquiry dates back to 2019

The SFIO investigation is an older proceeding, distinct from the reported bribery arrests. In a Lok Sabha answer dated 25 November 2019, the Ministry of Corporate Affairs said it had ordered SFIO to investigate DHFL and five other companies on 6 November 2019.^[4]

The ministry said its Regional Director for the Western Region had inspected DHFL and submitted a report on 24 October 2019. That inspection had not examined the involvement of banks and officials. At the time of the parliamentary answer, the ministry said it could not indicate when the SFIO investigation would be completed. That answer establishes the inquiry’s origin, not its present procedural status.^[4]

A separate Enforcement Directorate (ED) release dated 28 August 2026 described its money-laundering investigation concerning DHFL and its promoters. The ED said that investigation arose from a CBI FIR registered following a Union Bank of India complaint on behalf of a consortium of 17 banks.^[5]

According to the ED’s account of that FIR, the banks had sanctioned credit facilities totalling Rs 42,871.42 crore to DHFL. The allegations included a conspiracy involving Kapil Wadhawan and Dheeraj Wadhawan, diversion of loan funds and falsification of accounts, with an alleged loss of approximately Rs 34,615 crore to the lenders. The sanctioned facilities and alleged loss are different measures, neither of which represents the bribe amount in the SFIO officer’s case.^[5]

The ED also reported a search on 19 August 2026 and the freezing of approximately Rs 51.75 crore in a company’s bank account under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002. It alleged that the funds represented proceeds of crime associated with transactions involving a foreign property. That August action belongs to the money-laundering investigation; the CBI’s bribery statement does not connect those transactions to the alleged payment to the advocate.^[5][1]

The CBI statement and the cited arrest reports contain no response from the three arrested people and no court order establishing their custody or bail position. The precise favour allegedly promised to the complainant, beyond assistance in the DHFL investigation, is also not specified in the agency’s statement.^[1][2][3]

References

1. Central Bureau of Investigation. Press Detail.
2. The Times of India. CBI arrests SFIO deputy director, advocate in Rs 1 crore bribe case linked to DHFL scam probe. 15 October 2026.
3. ThePrint. CBI arrests IRS officer for bribe to ‘settle’ case linked to DHFL loan …
4. Ministry of Corporate Affairs. Lok Sabha Unstarred Question No. 1375: Borrowings by DHFL. 25 November 2019.
5. Directorate of Enforcement. Press release. 28 August 2026.