The total outstanding amount owed by wilful defaulters to Indian banks and financial institutions stood at ₹383,264 crore as of 31 March 2025, nearly ten times the ₹39,369 crore recorded at the same date in 2014, with the number of defaulters growing from 5,076 to 18,318 over the same period, finance minister (FM) Nirmala Sitharaman told the Lok Sabha in response to a starred question by MP Kalipada Saren Kherwal. ABG Shipyard Ltd topped the latest list of the ten largest wilful defaulters with an outstanding amount of ₹6,695 crore, followed closely by fugitive Mehul Choksi-owned Gitanjali Gems Ltd at ₹6,237 crore.
The data, sourced from TransUnion CIBIL Ltd and covering both suit-filed and non-suit-filed wilful defaulters of ₹25 lakh and above, provides the most comprehensive official picture of India's wilful default landscape since systematic reporting began under an RBI circular in June 2014.
A Decade of Growing Default
The year-wise data placed before Parliament tells a story of relentless accumulation. In March 2014, 5,076 borrowers with outstanding amounts of ₹25 lakh and above were classified as wilful defaulters, with a total outstanding of ₹39,369 crore. By March 2019, both numbers had more than doubled — 12,140 defaulters owing ₹1,93,806 crore. The pandemic years accelerated the trend: by March 2022, 16,005 borrowers owed ₹3,07,735 crore. The count peaked at 18,876 in March 2024 before marginally declining to 18,318 in March 2025 — though the outstanding amount continued to rise, reaching ₹3,83,265 crore.
The marginal decline in the number of defaulters between March 2024 and March 2025 — from 18,876 to 18,318 — may reflect recoveries, compromise settlements, or reclassifications rather than a systemic improvement, as the total outstanding amount continued to rise over the same period.
The Top Ten: A Familiar Roll Call
The list of the ten largest wilful defaulters as of 31 March 2025, as reported by all credit institutions to TransUnion CIBIL, is dominated by names that have featured prominently in India's banking and legal news for years.
ABG Shipyard Limited leads with ₹6,695 crore, followed by Gitanjali Gems at ₹6,237 crore, Beta Naphthol at ₹5,268 crore, Rakeshkumar Kuldipsingh Wadhawan at ₹4,291 crore, erstwhile directors, guarantors, and corporate guarantors of Bhushan Power & Steel Ltd at ₹3,811 crore, Raza Textiles at ₹3,260 crore, Gilt Pack Ltd at ₹3,081 crore, ABG Shipyard Ltd (reported separately by different credit institutions) at ₹2,846 crore, Rank Industries Ltd at ₹2,655 crore, and Housing Development and Infrastructure Ltd (HDIL) at ₹2,541 crore.
The appearance of ABG Shipyard twice in the top ten list — at different amounts — reflects a note of caution in the data: the top ten borrowers are determined based on names as reported by each credit institution, and variations in how names are reported by different institutions can lead to the same entity appearing multiple times. The government's response explicitly flagged this caveat.
How the Top Defaulters Have Changed Over Time
Tracking the top ten list across years reveals both the persistence of certain defaulters and the emergence of new ones. Zoom Developers Pvt Ltd topped the list in 2014 and 2015 but has since dropped off. Kingfisher Airlines, which entered the top ten in 2016 at ₹1,201 crore and peaked at ₹2,323 crore in 2017, no longer features in the most recent list — suggesting partial resolution.
Gitanjali Gems — the jewellery company associated with fugitive diamantaire Mehul Choksi — first entered the top ten in 2019 at ₹4,634 crore and held the top position from 2020 through 2024, with outstanding amounts growing steadily from ₹5,007 crore to ₹6,229 crore, before being displaced by ABG Shipyard in 2025.
ABG Shipyard, the subject of what central bureau of investigation (CBI) described as India's largest bank fraud case at the time of arrests in 2022, first appeared in the top ten in 2018 and has climbed steadily since, reaching ₹6,695 crore in 2025.
Rakeshkumar Wadhawan — linked to the Punjab and Maharashtra Co-operative (PMC) Bank fraud and HDIL — appears in the 2025 list for the first time at ₹4,291 crore, as does HDIL itself at ₹2,541 crore.
Can Wilful Defaulters Settle with Banks?
In the question, Kalipada Saren Kherwal, the member of Parliament (MP), also asked whether wilful defaulters can enter into compromise settlements with banks. This is the question that has generated significant public controversy, given the perception that such settlements allow defaulters to pay less than what they owe and walk away.
The finance minister's written reply confirmed that yes, banks may undertake compromise settlements with wilful defaulters, but within a strict framework and without prejudice to ongoing criminal proceedings. The primary rationale, as stated in the reply, is to enable multiple avenues for lenders to recover money without delay, given that prolonged legal proceedings cause asset value deterioration and lock lenders' funds in unproductive assets.
Key safeguards, as stated by Ms Sitharaman, include compromise settlement not available to borrowers as a matter of right as it is a discretion exercised by lenders based on commercial judgement; proposals and must be approved by the lender's board; criminal proceedings continue regardless of any settlement; a cooling period — determined by each bank's board-approved policy — must elapse before the bank can extend fresh credit to the same borrower; and no new credit facility can be granted for five years after a wilful defaulter's name is removed from the list for floating new ventures.
Compromise settlement is recognised as a valid resolution mechanism under the RBI (Commercial Banks — Resolution of Stressed Assets) Directions, 2025.
Penalties and Deterrents
The finance minister's reply also detailed the suite of measures in place to deter wilful default and penalise those already classified. Banks are required to examine whether criminal proceedings are warranted in each case, and removal of a defaulter's name from the list does not automatically end criminal proceedings. Banks must formulate board-approved policies for publishing photographs of wilful defaulters. No additional credit facility may be granted to a wilful defaulter or any entity with which the defaulter is associated. Wilful defaulters and companies with wilful defaulters as promoters or directors are debarred from accessing capital markets. Wilful defaulters are not eligible for the restructuring of credit facilities.
These measures are in addition to the requirement — introduced under Reserve Bank of India (RBI)'s master directions on treatment of wilful defaulters — that lenders submit the list of wilful defaulters to all four credit information companies on a monthly basis, with the lists publicly displayed on the CIC websites: suit.cibil.com, suit.experian.in, equifax.co.in, and crifhighmark.com.
The Scale of the Problem
The data placed before Parliament underlines the scale of India's wilful default challenge. At ₹3.83 lakh crore, the outstanding amount with wilful defaulters alone, leaving aside the broader category of non-performing assets (NPAs), represents a significant drag on the banking system's capacity to extend productive credit.
The near-tenfold increase over a decade, even as the government has introduced multiple recovery mechanisms, including the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC), RBI's stressed asset resolution framework, and compromise settlement guidelines, suggests that the pipeline of default continues to outpace the pace of resolution.
The marginal dip in the count of defaulters from 18,876 to 18,318 between March 2024 and March 2025 offers a sliver of hope. But with total outstanding continuing to rise, the quality of that resolution, and whether it represents genuine recovery or accounting reclassification, will bear close watching in the months ahead.
