A ₹200-crore Dubai wedding once made this investigation look like a celebrity scandal built for social media. The latest turn, however, is less glamorous and far more serious: investigators are now following an alleged ₹940.77-crore trail through listed companies, securities and a major international acquisition.

 

On July 14, 2026, the Enforcement Directorate arrested Vikas Garg in Delhi in connection with the wider Mahadev online betting racket. The agency alleges that funds generated through illegal wagering were routed into businesses linked to him and later used to buy shares, securities and other assets. The action has been taken under PMLA, short for the Prevention of Money Laundering Act. Garg has not been convicted, and his lawyers dispute the need for custodial questioning.

 

In brief: The arrest matters because it potentially connects an offshore betting network with India’s formal corporate and investment system. The agency says custody is needed to trace the funds. The defence says Garg had already cooperated and is not named in any of the eight underlying FIRs.

 

Why the Mahadev Betting App Case Matters Now?

For many readers, the Mahadev betting app became familiar through stories about Saurabh Chandrakar’s Dubai wedding and the entertainment figures who attended or performed. Attendance at an event does not establish involvement in any alleged offence.

 

According to the Enforcement Directorate’s July 10 press release, the agency provisionally attached residential properties, land parcels, equity shares and other securities valued at approximately ₹940.77 crore. It said the assets were linked to Garg, his family members and entities owned or controlled by him.



 

What Happened After the Arrest?

Garg was produced before Delhi’s Tis Hazari Court. The agency requested 48 hours of transit remand to transfer him to Raipur, where the special court handling the case is located.

Additional Sessions Judge Vijay Shankar granted 24 hours instead. Transit remand only permits transfer to the court handling the main case; it does not decide guilt.

The ANI court report published by The Economic Times said the Enforcement Directorate argued that custodial questioning was required to uncover the alleged financial trail. It also told the court that Garg failed to appear after being summoned.

Who Is the Businessman at the Centre of the Case?

Vikas Garg has been associated with listed businesses including Vikas Ecotech Limited, Vikas Lifecare Limited and Eraaya Lifespaces Limited. Eraaya later became Ebix Limited after acquiring US-based Ebix Inc and its global subsidiaries through a bankruptcy-court process.

 

Investigators allege that proceeds connected to the Mahadev online betting racket entered formal companies before being used for investments.

 

Hindustan Times reported that the arrest formed part of the investigation into Mahadev Online Book and Skyexchange.


 

Img Src : Youtube
 

Why Does the Agency Want Custody?

The official case rests on the allegation that approximately ₹940.77 crore in suspected proceeds was routed into entities linked to Garg.

 

The ED’s release says the funds moved through accommodation entries, shell entities and layered transactions designed to present tainted funds as legitimate. “Layering” means moving funds across several accounts, companies or investments so that their origin becomes difficult to trace.

 

The agency claims the funds were later used to acquire shares, securities and other assets. These remain allegations and must be tested before the court under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act.

 

How Did EbixCash Enter the Story?

One major allegation concerns EbixCash, which operates across forex, remittances and payments.

 

The Hindustan Times report said investigators allege a 64% stake in EbixCash was acquired through Eraaya Lifespaces using funds connected to illegal betting. It also said Eraaya valued its acquisition of Ebix Inc and its global subsidiaries at approximately ₹3,009 crore after a US bankruptcy-court auction.

 

What Has Ebix Limited Said?

A June 23 exchange disclosure, as reported by Hindustan Times, said Ebix Limited had been informed of an attachment order involving certain foreign entities and foreign portfolio investors that had invested in its securities.

 

The company said neither it nor its promoters had been accused of committing a predicate offence in those proceedings. A predicate offence is the underlying crime alleged to have generated the questioned funds.

A market disclosure summary reported that the order was dated June 5 and received by the company on June 23.



 

What Does the Defence Say?

Garg’s lawyers opposed the remand request and sought one day of interim bail. They said the Enforcement Case Information Report was registered in 2022 and that Garg had joined the investigation three times and submitted the required documents.

 

The defence also highlighted that he is not named in any of the eight FIRs. The prosecution maintained that a summons had not been complied with.

 

This dispute is important because joining an investigation earlier does not necessarily establish compliance with every later summons. At the same time, the absence of Garg’s name from the original FIRs forms an important part of the defence’s argument against custodial interrogation.

 

How Large Is the Alleged Network?

The Mahadev betting app allegedly worked through a franchise-style network of local “panels” controlled from abroad. The official release says the probe began with FIRs registered in Chhattisgarh, Andhra Pradesh, West Bengal and other jurisdictions over allegations including conspiracy, cheating and forgery.

 

Investigators claim the network generated more than ₹450 crore each month. The agency said earlier attachments, seizures and freezes totalled about ₹2,825 crore. The action involving Garg increased the cumulative amount to approximately ₹3,800 crore.

 

The wider Mahadev online betting racket has also been linked in reports to accused promoters Saurabh Chandrakar and Ravi Uppal. Chandrakar was reported to have been detained in Oman while Indian authorities pursued extradition.

 

Business Today reported that five chargesheets had named 74 accused entities and that 13 arrests had been made before Garg’s detention.

 

Why Should Entertainment Readers Follow It?

The celebrity angle brought the Mahadev betting app into public view, but the larger issue is how glamour can distract from the mechanics of an alleged financial network.

 

A celebrity attending or performing at a wedding is not automatically connected to the alleged offences being investigated. Readers should separate entertainment-industry visibility from evidence of financial or criminal involvement.

 

The case also matters to retail investors. When enforcement action touches listed businesses, the public needs clear disclosures about ownership and legal exposure.

 

It further demonstrates how an investigation that began with digital betting platforms can extend into foreign transactions, portfolio investments, corporate ownership and assets that appear entirely removed from the original operation.

 

What Happens Next?

Garg must be produced before the special court in Raipur. The agency can ask for further custody, while his lawyers can oppose the request and seek bail. Asset-attachment proceedings will continue separately and may also be challenged.

 

The court will consider whether further interrogation is justified and whether investigators have presented sufficient grounds for custody. The attachment of assets and the criminal proceedings will follow separate legal processes.

 

Any extended detention, prosecution or confiscation must follow the safeguards in PMLA. The allegations will also have to meet the evidentiary standards applied under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act.

 

For now, the arrest represents a major expansion of the investigation, not a judicial finding. The next phase will show whether investigators can establish the claimed link between betting proceeds, Garg-linked entities and the corporate transactions under scrutiny.