Mumbai court rejects bail plea of developer couple in Rs 1,000-crore fraud case

MUMBAI: The Sessions Court rejected the anticipatory bail plea of the developer and his wife who are accused in a large scale fraud case registered with the Economic Offences Wing, stating that both as directors of the construction firm played active role in executing the agreements for sale and allotment letters of the flats and have received consideration in Crores of Rupees from the flat purchasers.

NG Shukla, the additional session judge, last week rejected the ABA of Poonam Ashit Doshi, Director of M/s Zeus Housing & Construction Ltd. Special judge S R Navander rejected the ABA of Ashit Doshi on Monday.The case pertains to allegations of cheating and criminal breach of trust in the Zeus Residency redevelopment project at Sion Koliwada, carried out under the Slum Rehabilitation Authority (SRA) scheme. Doshi had moved anticipatory Bail seeking protection from arrest in offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sections 3, 4, 5, 8, and 13 of the Maharashtra Ownership Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act, 1963 (MOFA).According to the EOW, Poonam Doshi and her husband Ashit Doshi, both directors of Zeus Housing, collected huge sums of money from flat purchasers by selling nearly 100 flats in the Zeus Residency project, valued collectively at more than ₹1,000 crore. The couple allegedly diverted these funds to other firms and personal accounts instead of using them for construction.

The complaint was filed by a flat purchaser who alleged that he had bought four flats—two in his own name and two in his father’s name—by paying amounts ranging from ₹32.40 lakh to ₹90.47 lakh each.

The informant further alleged that some flats were sold twice to different buyers, and despite receiving massive consideration amounts, the accused failed to complete the project.The court rejected the defense argument that Poonam was a “nominal or non-executive director” with no active involvement. It held that she had directly signed 17 agreements for sale and two allotment letters, evidencing her active participation in the sale of flats.

The court also noted that she and her husband had issued allotment letters for five flats, received ₹2.12 crore, but never executed the sale agreements for those purchasers.Judge Shukla further observed that the accused couple had shown flats already sold as “unsold” in their submission to investigators, and that funds were diverted to Pradeep Trading Company and other related firms. The court said this amounted to “misappropriation of funds received from flat purchasers.”The

court also took note that Doshi had suppressed the fact of her involvement in another criminal case, registered at Antop Hill Police Station, in her present bail application. Though she had later filed the charge sheet from that case, the judge observed that non-disclosure of such antecedents constituted “suppression of material facts.

”The prosecution and interveners opposed the bail plea, arguing that the project’s construction began in 2007, but despite selling flats up to the 29th floor—beyond the sanctioned limit of 25 floors—the accused failed to complete the building even after a decade.