RANGANATHAN LAKSHMAN IYERversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

                                                     915-ABA-2614-2026.odt

Harish

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
     ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO. 2614 OF 2026
Ranganathan Lakshman Iyer                                ...Applicant
            V/s.
The State Of Maharashtra                                 ...Respondent
_____________________________________________________________
Adv. Walter Fernandes, for the Applicant.
Adv. Bapu V. Holambe, APP for the Respondent – State.
API - Nilophar Shaikh, Kasturba Marg Police Station, Mumbai is present.
________________________________________________________
                      CORAM : PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.
                      DATE : 17TH SEPTEMBER, 2026.

P.C. :-

1.           Heard learned counsel for applicant as well as learned APP

for the respondent-state.

2.           The applicant has filed the instant application seeking

pre-arrest bail in connection with Crime No. 510 of 2026, dated

29.07.2026 registered with Wadala T. T. Police Station, Brihanmumbai for

the offence punishable under Sections 316(5) and 318(4) of Bharatiya

Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.

3.           The FIR is registered on the basis of a report lodged by the

complainant alleging that this applicant has induced the complainant and



                                   1/6
                                                        915-ABA-2614-2026.odt

several other persons to purchase flats and shops in scheme by name,

“Nisarg SRA Co-Op Housing Society Ltd”, at a concessional rate. It is

alleged that he has represented to the complainant and several other

persons that the developer by name M/s. Kukreja Construction

represented through Mr. Sahil Kukreja had agreed to allot flats and shops

to prospective purchasers at concessional rate and believing on this

representation, the complainant has paid an amount of ₹1,10,00,000/- to

this applicant.

4.            In the report, the complainant has alleged that he wanted to

purchase two flats and two commercial shops in the said scheme and for

that purpose, he has paid several amounts from time to time to this

applicant by way of RTGS and cash and the details of the bank accounts

are mentioned in the report. It is alleged that the entire amount was paid to

the applicant in the month of May 2025 itself. However, neither the flats

and shops were allotted nor any possession was given to this applicant. It

is alleged in the report that the complainant and several other persons who

had paid huge amounts to the applicant had repeatedly insisted for

handing over the possession and at that time, the applicant gave them

certain keys of certain blocks, but it was found that the keys were not of

the respective blocks. The complainant has alleged that along with him,

his relatives and friends, as named in the report had similarly paid several

amounts to the applicant for purchasing their respective blocks, total


                                    2/6
                                                        915-ABA-2614-2026.odt

₹4,32,89,000, however, the applicant has not ensured allotment of any

blocks to these persons and has even failed to return their amounts. On the

basis of these allegations, the FIR came to be registered against this

applicant.

5.            Advocate Fernandez learned counsel for applicant submitted

that this applicant is falsely implicated in the instant offence. He submitted

that the amounts received by the applicant from the complainant and other

persons were handed over in cash to the developer, Mr. Kukreja, and

hence the entire responsibility of allotment was upon Mr. Kukreja. In

support of his submissions, he invited attention to a document, in the

nature of Letter of Intent dated 18th January, 2022, in between M/s.

Kukreja Constructions, Nirsarg SRA Co-operative Housing Society and

complainant and submitted that the complainant is entitled to invoke the

arbitration clause of the said letter against Mr. Kukreja and the lodging of

the FIR against this applicant is without any basis. He also submitted that

the    alleged offence against this applicant is not attracted since he is not

the   developer of the SRA scheme. He submitted that this applicant is

ready to extend cooperation in the matter of investigation of the entire

offence against the Builder and other persons.

6.            As against this, learned APP for respondent opposed the

application and submitted that there are specific allegations in the report

against this applicant. It is submitted that the complainant has specifically


                                     3/6
                                                           915-ABA-2614-2026.odt

stated the details of payments made to this applicant from time to time by

way of RTGS and cash. It is submitted that the payments made to the

complainant and several other persons total amounting to ₹4,32,89,000/-,

shows the gravity of offence as the prospective purchasers have believed on

the inducement and misrepresentation made by the applicant and had paid

their hard earned money. Learned APP submitted that during the course of

investigation, it was revealed that this applicant has collected several

amounts from prospective purchasers by way of RTGS and cash and only to

create an impression about allotment of blocks in their name, has forged the

documents by incorporating names of prospective purchasers in the list of

allottees, just to create an impression that there is an allotment in their name.

It is submitted that even though this applicant was not the actual developer,

he has collected huge amounts from those persons and in view of failure to

get the blocks allotted to them, has committed the offence of cheating. By

inviting attention to the statements of the prospective purchasers, it is

submitted that the applicant has followed similar pattern of inducing the

other prospective purchasers to pay substantial amounts to him, however,

there is no allotment of any blocks to them.

7.            Apart from this, it is submitted by learned APP that during

investigation, the representative of M/s. Kukreja Construction Company by

name Mahendra Shyam Sundar Yadav has given a statement that this

applicant has misrepresented various prospective purchasers by misusing


                                      4/6
                                                          915-ABA-2614-2026.odt

name of M/s. Kukreja Construction Company, and by forging documents on

their   letterhead, cheated several persons. On the basis of the statements

recorded during investigation, learned APP submitted that this applicant has

misrepresented to the prospective purchasers that Flat/Shops were allotted to

them on the basis of forged letter and has extracted huge amounts. It is

submitted that considering the magnitude of offence, the investigation is

going on and the applicant has not responded to the notices sent by

investigating officer and has not extended any cooperation. It is therefore

submitted that the custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary.

8.            Perused the FIR and the documents made available by learned

APP, including statements recorded during investigation. It has to be noted

that the complainant has leveled specific allegations against this applicant in

the FIR and has given details about payments made to him. Pertinent to note

that there is no dispute by the applicant that the amounts mentioned in the

FIR have been received by the applicant by way of RTGS. The applicant has

failed to file on record any document to show that the amounts were paid to

the developer / M/s. Kukreja Construction and as such the contentions of the

applicant about giving money to the developer and the resultant

responsibility of allotment to be of the developer, is not acceptable. It has

also to be noted that, on the contrary, the representative of the developer has

given a statement that this applicant has misused the letter head, seal etc. of

its construction company and in view of this, it prima facie appears that the


                                      5/6
                                                          915-ABA-2614-2026.odt

applicant has made misrepresentation to the prospective purchasers, from

whom he has collected huge amounts. As such, detailed investigation in this

regard is necessary.

9.            It has to be noted that during investigation statements of

various prospective purchasers have been recorded. It thus appears that the

applicant has induced several persons to pay him huge amounts by

representing them that they will get blocks in the SRA scheme. It appears

that the prospective purchasers named in the FIR, 14 in number, have paid

an amount of Rs. 4,32,89,000/- to this applicant, however, they have not

been allotted any blocks. Thus, there appears sufficient material to show

prima facie involvement of this applicant in the crime.

10.           Considering the nature of the allegations and the material

placed on record collected by Investigating Agency, at this stage, I am of the

opinion that custodial interrogation of this applicant is required. Having

regard to the magnitude of the offence and the overall conduct of the

applicant, I am not inclined to exercise discretion to grant bail under section

482 of BNSS. Hence the application is rejected.



                                      (PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.)




                                     6/6