Mumbai Court Denies Anticipatory Bail to Real Estate Developer and Son in Flat Allotment Fraud Case
The Mumbai Sessions Court has denied anticipatory bail to Ashok Jethwa and his son Mihir, real estate developers from Triveni Developers Ltd, in a case involving the alleged failure to deliver flats or refund payments.
Real EstateFraudAnticipatory BailFlat AllotmentCourt DecisionReal EstateJul 14, 2025
The case was registered on January 1, 2023, by a flat purchaser who claimed that Ashok Jethwa and his son had accepted payments for two flats in one of their company’s projects. Despite receiving the payments, the developers did not deliver the flats and did not refund the money.
In their bail plea, Ashok Jethwa and Mihir argued that they had provided an allotment letter to the complainant as per the agreement. They also mentioned that the project's completion was delayed due to the pandemic between 2020 and 2022. However, the court noted that the redevelopment agreement with the society was canceled in 2023. Despite this, the developers neither returned the money nor informed the complainant about the cancellation.
The prosecution contended that Ashok Jethwa and Mihir are partners in Triveni Developers Ltd and had issued an allotment letter for the flat to the complainant. However, the flat was sold to another person, leaving the complainant without a flat or a refund. The investigating officer further stated that the duo failed to appear before the investigating officer when served with notices.
The complainant also pointed out that Ashok Jethwa and Mihir have been involved in several other cases and are not residing at the address they provided for communication. The court, after reviewing the documents and arguments, noted that the developers had accepted a large sum from the complainant and their sister-in-law. The court observed that the developers’ actions showed their intention to defraud the complainants.
The court stated, “The document produced by the applicants shows that the society to which the applicants made an agreement was canceled by the society in 2023. However, the applicants neither returned the money nor informed the informant, which indicates their intention.” The court further rejected the developers' contention that the complainant was trying to convert a civil case into a criminal one.
In its final decision, the court refused to grant the duo any relief from arrest, stating, “Granting pre-arrest bail at this stage would create hurdles in the investigation. The tampering of prosecution witnesses cannot be ruled out. Prima facie, an offence has been made out against the applicants, and it cannot be inferred that they were falsely implicated in the crime.”
This ruling highlights the court's commitment to ensuring a fair and thorough investigation in cases of alleged fraud, especially in the real estate sector, where such issues can profoundly affect the lives of homebuyers.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the main reason the court denied anticipatory bail?
The court denied anticipatory bail because it found that the developers had accepted a large sum of money from the complainant and failed to deliver the flats or return the money, indicating their intention to defraud.
What evidence did the prosecution present?
The prosecution presented evidence that the developers had issued an allotment letter for the flat to the complainant but later sold the flat to another person, leaving the complainant without a flat or a refund.
What was the developers' defense in their bail plea?
The developers claimed that the project's completion was delayed due to the pandemic and that the redevelopment agreement with the society was canceled in 2023. They also stated that they had provided an allotment letter to the complainant as per the agreement.
Why did the court reject the developers' contention that the complainant was trying to convert a civil case into a criminal one?
The court rejected this contention because the documents and evidence showed that the developers had accepted a large sum of money from the complainant and failed to deliver the flats or return the money, indicating their intention to defraud.
What are the potential consequences of the court's decision?
The court's decision ensures that the investigation can proceed without interference from the developers. It also sends a strong message against fraud in the real estate sector, protecting the rights of homebuyers.
Related News Articles
Hardik Pandya's Net Worth: A Closer Look at His Wealth and Assets
From his lucrative IPL contracts to his impressive real estate portfolio
Boosting Realty Affordability: Experts Call for Policy Shifts and Infra Improvements
Industry experts emphasize the need for policy changes and infrastructure development to address affordability issues in the real estate market.
Pune's Real Estate Empire: Minor's Father in Custody Over Cheating Case
A Pune court has allowed the police to take custody of the father of the minor accused in the Porsche crash case, in a cheating case registered against him at Kondhwa police station.
Revolutionizing Traffic Management: Pune Police, PMC, and Google Collaborate to Improve Road Infrastructure
Pune takes a significant step towards reducing traffic congestion and travel time with the collaboration of Pune Police, PMC, and Google on 32 main roads.
New Developments in Rs 100 Crore Real Estate Investment Fraud
Prospect Realty, a firm registered before the sub-registrar of Salcete, Margao, is at the center of a massive Rs 100 crore investment fraud. The firm, engaged in the real estate business, has been accused of misleading investors with false promises. Myron
Maharashtra Government to Mandate Precast Construction for Mumbai Real Estate
The Maharashtra government is working on a policy to make precast construction mandatory for real estate projects in Mumbai, aiming to streamline construction processes and enhance building quality.