₹230 crore ghee adulteration scam: ED arrests supplier in TTD fraud case

Kailash Chand Mangla, promoter of Sukriti Foods Pvt. Ltd., was arrested by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) on September 17, 2026 under Section 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), making him the second supplier detained in a sprawling ghee adulteration case tied to the Tirumala Tirupati Devasthanams (TTD). The ED alleges that the total fraudulent ghee supply to TTD between 2019 and 2024 was worth approximately ₹230 crore, of which Sukriti Foods is linked to roughly ₹96 crore.

Mangla was produced before the Special Court (PMLA) in Visakhapatnam, which remanded him to judicial custody. The investigation originates from an FIR registered at Tirupati East Police Station, charging criminal conspiracy, cheating, forgery, and corruption. The ED's money laundering probe runs parallel to that criminal case.

What the alleged adulteration actually involved

Ghee adulteration in India is not new, but the scale and the specific adulterants alleged here are worth examining closely. According to the ED, the fake product was manufactured using refined palm oil, palm kernel oil, and palmolein, then processed with industrial additives including MG-90, monoglycerides, Myvacet Soft 400, and acetic acid ester. The finished product was then allegedly labelled and sold as Agmark Special Grade Cow Ghee.

Agmark certification, administered by the Directorate of Marketing and Inspection (DMI) under the Ministry of Agriculture, is supposed to guarantee that a product meets defined quality and purity standards. For cow ghee, Agmark Special Grade specifies minimum fat content, moisture limits, and the absence of foreign fats. Selling palm-oil-based fat under that label is not just a food safety violation; it is fraud against a certification system that millions of consumers and institutional buyers trust.

The chemicals named in the ED's allegations are worth noting. Monoglycerides are emulsifiers (INS 471 in FSSAI's additive schedule) permitted in several processed foods but not in pure ghee. Myvacet Soft 400 is a commercial acetylated monoglyceride product used in food manufacturing to modify texture. MG-90 is a high-purity monoglyceride concentrate. None of these belong in a product sold as pure cow ghee under FSSAI's Food Safety and Standards (Food Products Standards and Food Additives) Regulations.

The ED further alleges that Mangla coordinated supply through front entities: Sh. Vaishnavi Dairy Specialities Pvt. Ltd., Malganga Milk and Agro Products Pvt. Ltd., and A.R. Dairy Foods Pvt. Ltd. False purchase and sale records were allegedly maintained to disguise the use of palm oil and present the operation as legitimate dairy production.

Why this matters beyond one temple

TTD manages the Tirumala Venkateswara Temple, one of the most visited religious sites in the world. The ghee supplied to TTD is used in the preparation of the famous Tirupati laddu prasadam, a product with Geographical Indication (GI) tag status. Millions of devotees consume it as a sacred food item, with no expectation that it contains palm oil derivatives or industrial emulsifiers.

For clean-label and religious-diet consumers, this case exposes a specific gap: institutional procurement at scale is vulnerable to adulteration when testing is infrequent or when suppliers can falsify documentation. TTD had previously faced controversy in 2024 when lab tests on ghee samples flagged the presence of foreign fats, which triggered the original criminal complaint. The ED's PMLA investigation is the financial follow-up to that.

The earlier arrest in this case was of Vipin Jain, promoter and director of Bhole Baba Organic Dairy Milk Pvt. Ltd., who is separately alleged to have orchestrated manufacture and supply of adulterated ghee to TTD. The ED has said further investigation is underway, which suggests more arrests or asset attachments are possible.

For anyone buying ghee in India, this case is a reminder that Agmark certification alone is not a guarantee of purity if the certification process can be gamed through false records. FSSAI's Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006 defines adulteration under Section 3(1)(a), and selling adulterated food carries penalties up to life imprisonment in cases involving grievous injury. Whether those provisions will be invoked alongside the PMLA charges is not yet clear from the ED's statements.

What buyers and cooks should do

Pure cow ghee has a straightforward composition: milk fat, and nothing else. FSSAI's standard for desi ghee (cow ghee) under FSS (Food Products Standards and Food Additives) Regulations, 2011 permits no added emulsifiers, no vegetable fats, and no flavour-modifying chemicals.

At home, a basic adulteration check is the refrigeration test: pure ghee solidifies uniformly and is granular when scooped cold. Ghee adulterated with palm oil tends to solidify differently, often smoother and more homogenous, because palm oil's fat crystal structure differs from milk fat. This is not a definitive lab test, but it is a quick first filter.

For institutional buyers, temples, caterers, and food businesses, the TTD case makes a strong argument for third-party lab testing at intake, not just at the point of supplier onboarding. FSSAI-accredited labs can run gas chromatography to detect foreign fats in ghee; the test is not expensive relative to the procurement volumes involved.

For retail consumers, brands that publish batch-level test reports, or that source from traceable single-origin dairies, carry more verifiable claims than those relying solely on Agmark or FSSAI licence numbers on the label. Several smaller Indian ghee producers now share lab certificates on their websites or via QR codes; that practice is worth rewarding with purchases.

The ED has not yet announced the total value of assets attached in this case. Given that the alleged fraud ran for five years across multiple front companies, the financial investigation is likely still in early stages.