E-Paper
Court rejects bizman’s pre-arrest bail in ₹97 lakh car-sale case
Pune court rejected pre-arrest bail application of businessman accused of allegedly misappropriating ₹97.01 lakh in a dispute involving the sale of 16 four-wheelers
Prefer HTon Google
Pune: A Pune court rejected the pre-arrest bail application of businessman Sanjay Bramhanand Agarwal, accused of allegedly misappropriating ₹97.01 lakh in a dispute involving the sale of 16 four-wheelers. The court observed that a memorandum of understanding (MOU) concerning an Audi Q7 contained a false statement about the loss of the vehicle’s original documents, indicating fraudulent intention.
Additional sessions judge SR Pawar rejected Agarwal’s application on August 29. An FIR was registered at Deccan police station on April 4, 2026, under Sections 316(2), 316(5) and 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). The investigation is underway.
According to the prosecution, the informant and his father were engaged in buying and selling cars. Agarwal, who was known to the informant’s father, allegedly introduced them to co-accused Mohammad Bagwan in September 2022. After an initial transaction involving five cars, photographs of 16 vehicles were allegedly shared with the informant between September 20, 2022 and June 26, 2023.
The FIR alleges that Agarwal and Bagwan received ₹72.91 lakh and ₹48.10 lakh, respectively, as advance payments, but the vehicles were not delivered.
The dispute also involved an Audi Q7, valued at ₹18.50 lakh, which had allegedly been returned by a customer to the informant and later handed back to Agarwal. Agarwal initially returned ₹9 lakh and subsequently paid ₹10 lakh on March 26, 2025 and ₹5 lakh on June 25, 2025. The prosecution alleged that he failed to repay the remaining amount.
Agarwal argued that the dispute was civil and contractual, pointing out that an earlier complaint filed with Wakad police had been examined by the ACP, who concluded in December 2024 that it was a civil dispute. His lawyer also cited the absence of a written agreement, unsettled accounts, inconsistencies in the FIR and lack of criminal antecedents. The defence argued that custodial interrogation was unnecessary and police could not be used as a recovery agency.
The prosecution opposed the plea, alleging that Agarwal had agreed before the ACP to repay the amount but failed to do so, had not cooperated with the investigation and had threatened the informant by claiming underworld connections.
The court noted that several circumstances, including the earlier police inquiry, delay in lodging the FIR, bank statements and WhatsApp conversations, favoured Agarwal. However, it found the October 2, 2023 MOU concerning the Audi Q7 significant. The document stated that the vehicle’s original papers had been lost, while the informant claimed they were still in his possession.
The judge observed that although the MOU was not forged or executed through personation, it contained a false statement about the loss of the documents. “From this document itself fraudulent intentions of the applicant can be gathered,” the court said, adding that the case was therefore not purely a civil transaction.
The court also considered a May 20, 2026 order rejecting regular bail to a co-accused, in which the transaction was viewed as involving alleged misappropriation by a merchant or agent.
Agarwal had earlier received interim protection from arrest on April 10. In light of the material gathered during the investigation, the court declined to extend that protection and rejected his pre-arrest bail application.
