E-Paper
Court rejects Sheetal Tejwani’s bail plea
Observing that there is a possibility of tampering with prosecution evidence, the court held that merely being a woman cannot be the sole ground for grant of bail in a serious economic offence involving government land transactions worth ₹300 crore.
Pune: Additional sessions judge D P Ragit on Monday rejected Sheetal Tejwani’s bail plea, taking into account her active role and involvement in the alleged sale transactions and the non-payment of stamp duty amounting to ₹21 crore in the Mundhwa land deal. The order was uploaded on the court website on Tuesday.
Observing that there is a possibility of tampering with prosecution evidence, the court held that merely being a woman cannot be the sole ground for grant of bail in a serious economic offence involving government land transactions worth ₹300 crore.
The investigating officer, in his written submission, informed the court that seven other cases of a similar nature, involving allegations of cheating, criminal breach of trust and forgery, have been registered against Tejwani at Pimpri, Hinjawadi, Shivajinagar and Khadak police stations. The officer further submitted that if released on bail, there is a likelihood of the applicant tampering with prosecution evidence.
Tejwani was arrested on December 16, 2025, while co-accused Ravindra Taru was arrested on December 7, 2025. After completion of the investigation, a charge sheet was filed against them before the trial court, while investigation against Digvijay Patil of Amadea Enterprises LLP was pending.
The court further observed that a perusal of the investigation papers, including the FIR, witness statements and documents annexed to the charge sheet, prima facie indicate that the land is recorded in the name of “Mumbai Government”.
The order noted that the said land was originally Mahar watan land, abolished in 1955, and was leased to the Botanical Survey of India in 1958 for 50 years. It was subsequently leased again in 1999 for a further 50-year period by the collector, Pune. At the time of execution and registration of the disputed sale deed (No 9018/2025), the land was not recorded in the names of 272 watandars as owners, though their names had earlier appeared in the ‘other rights’ column of the closed 7/12 extract, the court said.
The applicant is alleged to have acted as power of attorney holder for the original watandars, including Ashok Abaji Gaikwad and 271 others, who purportedly executed 34 registered powers of attorney and 55 notarised powers of attorney in favour of M/s Paramount Infrastructure through the applicant during 2006-07 and 2007-08. The court noted that the registered powers of attorney were allegedly executed without the requisite declaration by the applicant.
The order further stated that co-accused Ravindra Taru, serving as sub-registrar, was duty-bound to verify the accuracy of documents attached to the disputed sale deed and to ensure collection of the requisite stamp duty for registration of the sale transaction. As per the charge sheet, Taru allegedly directed the data operator to select the ‘movable’ property option instead of ‘agricultural land’ in the Revenue Department’s I-Sarita computer system, without obtaining the requisite stamp duty applicable to immovable property.
The court observed that Taru, thereby, facilitated the commission of the offence by allegedly concealing material information at the time of registration of the disputed sale deed, causing a huge loss to the government exchequer by not collecting the stamp duty.
