MUMBAI: “In the FIR it is specifically mentioned that, the applicant is having no right over the remaining land, despite of it, for financial benefits, the applicant threatened to the complainant and other persons of Federation.
It is further mentioned in the FIR that, the intention of the applicant is to use additional 33% FSI and to earn profit of huge amount. So, since beginning the intention of the applicant is to cheat the complainant and to commit the offence of breach of trust.
The allegations in the FIR prima facie shows the active involvement of the present applicant in commission of the crime. “ stated Shilpa Todkar, the additional Sessions judge while rejecting the anticipatory bail application of Ravi Punjabi (45), a developer who is accused in a multi-crore property dispute involving allegations of forgery, criminal conspiracy, and breach of trust.
The case, registered at Borivali Police Station against Punjabi last month includes charges under Sections 236, 237, 318(4), 335, 336(2), 336(3), 338, and 340(2) read with Section 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.
The court cited the need for custodial interrogation of Punjabi to recover original documents allegedly forged by the accused. The court observed that the allegations against Punjabi were serious in nature, involving the use of forged documents to claim ownership of a prime plot in Borivali worth approximately Rs. 500 crores.
The court noted that the FIR filed by Deepak Shah on behalf of the society provided prima facie evidence of forgery and conspiracy. It is alleged that Punjabi falsely claimed ownership of the land using forged documents, which were also submitted in judicial proceedings.
The original forged documents are believed to be in the custody of the accused, making custodial interrogation necessary for their recovery and to verify if these documents were used for further illegal transactions.
The Investigating Officer highlighted Punjabi’s criminal background, including a prior conviction under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA). The court agreed that there was a significant risk of evidence tampering if Punjabi was granted anticipatory bail.
The prosecution also argued that Punjabi threatened witnesses and filed false extortion complaints to obstruct the investigation.
The disputed property, located on Shimpoli Road, Borivali, was originally owned by “Bai Zaveribai Mulraj Karsandas Charitable Trust” and later sold to “Sanskruti Kendra Trust.” The development rights were transferred to Rekha Punjabi, proprietor of R.K. Builders, through a Power of Attorney.
Despite not being a legal heir to the original landowners, Ravi Punjabi claimed ownership by filing a false affidavit and attempting to register the property in his name.
The court observed that the documents submitted by the accused did not establish his ownership. Investigations revealed that Punjabi earned over Rs. 200 crores by constructing buildings on the disputed land. The court noted that the accused’s actions were allegedly part of a larger conspiracy involving a syndicate linked to infamous figures like Ravi Pujari and Mandar Borkar.
The prosecution argued that the accused aimed to exploit an additional 33% Floor Space Index (FSI) to reap substantial financial gains. Advocate Rajendra Rathod appeared for the accused, arguing that the case was of a civil nature and did not warrant criminal prosecution.
Rathod contended that the FIR was strategically filed to harass Punjabi and halt the development of the disputed property. The prosecution, represented by APP Sachin Jadhav, and the intervener’s advocate Punit Shukla, strongly opposed the bail, emphasizing the seriousness of the allegations and the potential threat to the investigation.
The court concluded that granting anticipatory bail would hinder the investigation and embolden the accused to tamper with evidence. Highlighting the gravity of the charges and the need for a detailed investigation, the court dismissed the application, paving the way for further legal proceedings.