Thane Sessions Court Rejects Anticipatory Bail for Builder in ₹170 Crore Land Fraud Case
The Thane Sessions Court has rejected the anticipatory bail application filed by real estate businessman Ramesh Madhav Bhadge, observing his prima facie involvement in a large-scale land fraud allegedly involving forged documents, impersonation, and a transaction valued at around Rs 170 crore.
The court, in its order, stated, “The whole transaction is of Rs 170 crores. A huge amount is involved in this case. This is an economic offence. Though the charge-sheet is filed, considering the role and involvement of the applicant, if pre-arrest bail is granted to him, he will tamper with the prosecution witnesses and is likely to flee. Therefore, in my view, this is not a fit case to grant pre-arrest bail to the applicant.”
Bhadge had approached the court seeking anticipatory bail in connection with a case registered with the Kashimira Police Station under various provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023, including cheating, forgery, and criminal conspiracy. The case relates to a disputed 20-acre and 35-guntha land parcel situated at Mira Mahajanwadi, Mira Road.
According to the prosecution, the land was originally purchased in a High Court auction in 1978 by D.K. Shaha, the chief promoter of Manish Industrial. After Shaha’s death in 1994, his legal heirs continued to remain in possession of the land. However, the accused allegedly executed a forged power of attorney in 2024 by impersonating the deceased owner and using fabricated Aadhaar, PAN, ration card, and birth certificate documents. On the basis of this alleged forged power of attorney, agreements and memorandums of understanding were executed to sell the land to third parties.
Opposing the bail plea, the investigating officer submitted that Bhadge was allegedly aware of the impersonation and actively participated in preparing forged documents, opening bank accounts using fake identities, and fabricating payment records. The prosecution further argued that Bhadge allegedly deleted WhatsApp chats and other digital evidence, and that several forged documents, including a death certificate, were yet to be seized.
The accused, in his plea, claimed that he was falsely implicated and had himself been cheated by the co-accused. He argued that he was a victim of fraud, had no criminal antecedents, and had cooperated with the investigation. He also contended that the transactions were entered into in good faith based on documents presented to him as genuine.
After hearing arguments from all sides, Additional Sessions Judge D.S. Deshmukh held that the material on record indicated the applicant’s active role in the alleged conspiracy.
