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
Indian REITs Distribute Rs 1371 Crore to Unitholders in Q1 FY24
Four publicly listed real estate investment trusts have distributed Rs 1,371 crore to their unit holders for the first quarter of this fiscal, according to industry data.
Birla Estates Expands its Footprint in Thane with 30.8-Acre Land Acquisition
Birla Estates forays into Thane real estate market with massive land acquisition, aims to develop prime mixed-use project.
NCLT Orders Fresh Start for Lavasa Corporation's Insolvency Process
Lavasa Corporation's insolvency process to restart after Darwin Platform Infrastructure Ltd fails to implement resolution plan
PM Housing Scheme Exploited by Corrupt Agents in Delhi
The real estate market in Delhi has been rocked by a massive fraud involving corrupt agents misusing the PM housing scheme. Many buyers, like Jameel, who owns property worth crores, are investing in these low-cost flats with the intention of flipping them
Trump's First Office Project in India: Pune to Host a Trump-Branded Office Building
The Trump Organisation, in partnership with Tribeca Developers, is set to construct its first-ever office project in Pune, expanding its global presence into India's thriving technology hub.
Delta Corp Redefines Strategy for Hospitality and Real Estate Ventures
Delta Corp has announced a refined demerger plan aimed at optimizing the financial and operational aspects of its hospitality and real estate businesses. The revised strategy focuses on enhancing the value of the Dhargalim project in Goa, a pivotal elemen