Spl court dismisses ₹50,000-crore MHADA land grab complaint

The complaint, even if taken at face value, primarily pointed towards possible offences such as forgery, fabrication of documents and cheating under the Indian Penal Code rather than corruption offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, the court said

MUMBAI: A special court under the Prevention of Corruption (PC) Act on Friday dismissed a private complaint alleging a Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (Mhada) plot in Bandra East was fraudulently diverted for a slum redevelopment project causing a loss of ₹50,000 crore to the government, holding that the allegations did not disclose a prima facie corruption offence under the PC Act.

(Shutterstock)

The complaint, filed by Mohd Rafique Sayyed and a proposed cooperative housing society, alleged that a Mhada land in Bharat Nagar, Bandra East had been passed off as a “censused slum” through fabricated records and false certifications to facilitate a slum redevelopment project involving the Housing Development and Infrastructure Limited (HDIL) and other entities. The anti-corruption bureau (ACB) had registered a first information report (FIR) regarding the alleged fraud, the complainant claimed.

The promoters of HDIL, Rakesh Kumar Wadhawan and Sarang Wadhawan, were earlier under investigation for their role in several redevelopment and financial fraud cases, including the PMC Bank scam and the Patra Chawl redevelopment case.

Special Judge Shayana Patil noted that the complainants alleged that the then Chief Officer of the Mumbai Housing Board had issued a “false certificate” declaring around 23,387.80 square metres of MHADA land as a censused slum, although information obtained under the Right to Information (RTI) Act reportedly showed no such record existed with the housing authority. The complaint further alleged that records used to establish slum-dweller eligibility for the redevelopment project – including annexure-II documents, photopasses and ration cards – were “false and fabricated”.

However, the court held that the allegations, even if taken at face value, primarily pointed towards possible offences such as forgery, fabrication of documents and cheating under the Indian Penal Code rather than corruption offences under the PC Act.

“As such it can be said that the allegations are on the point of preparation of false or bogus documents for facilitating declaration of particular area or locality as the Census slum. However, such contentions would attract offences within the purview of ‘forgery’, ‘fabrication of documents’, ‘cheating’, etc. under IPC,” the court observed.

The court said the complaint did not contain any specific allegations of bribery, illegal gratification or pecuniary gain by public servants, and the complainants had also failed to show that any accused had obtained a “valuable thing or pecuniary advantage” through corrupt or illegal means or by abuse of official position.

The court took note of the fact that the ACB had investigated the matter after registering an FIR, and subsequently filed a “C summary” report concluding that no substance was found in the allegations.

The judge additionally questioned the delay in pursuing the complaint, noting that the complainants had relied on RTI replies allegedly received in 2018, but they approached the court only years later, without adequately explaining the delay. The dispute appeared “mainly of the civil nature” and the complainants had not clarified whether they had pursued remedies under relevant municipal laws, the court said.

The court dismissed the complaint, saying there was “no sufficient ground to proceed against any of the accused with issuance of process for any offence under PC Act”.