Mumbai News

Bombay HC refuses interim relief from arrest to developers booked for not giving possession of flats – The Indian Express

The Bombay High Court on Monday refused interim protection from arrest to two developers, who were booked by the Mira Road police in 2018 for not giving possession of two flats to a buyer and instead selling them again to others.

On January 29, 2021, the Thane sessions court had cancelled anticipatory bail granted to the developers by it in June 2018. After a non-bailable warrant (NBW) was issued against the builders on October 15, this year, they had moved HC and sought interim protection from arrest.

A vacation bench of Justice Madhav J Jamdar on October 31 observed that as the builders had not challenged the bail cancellation order for one year and nine months – until October 27 – cancellation of anticipatory bail was prima facie justified and no interim protection can be granted.

The HC was hearing the pre-arrest bail plea filed by Intekhab Hasan Syed and another builder, seeking that the January 29, 2021, order be quashed and the anticipatory bail granted to them in June 2018 be restored. The plea also sought that the NBW issued by the magistrate court in Thane be set aside.

Subscriber Only Stories

The HC referred to the June 2018 order that granted pre-arrest bail to the builders on the basis that they would evict the new buyers and hand over the flats to the complainant within one month.

After the builders failed to hand over the flats, the complainant sought cancellation of pre-arrest bail granted to them.

After Justice Jamdar asked whether the builders were now ready to handover the flats to the complainant, advocate Ghanshyam Upadhyay, appearing for the developers, expressed inability to do so.


Upadhyay said that the builders need at least 15 days to get the new buyers to vacate the flats.

Justice Jamdar said, “Applicants have pocketed substantial consideration from the complainant by sale of said flats and thereafter sold the same flats to new purchasers… Advocate Upadhyay’s contention that balance consideration has not been paid by the complainant.”

“Therefore, the applicants are not in a position to hand over possession of flats is totally baseless and misleading, as even according to him, the said flats are in possession of subsequent flat purchasers,” Jamdar added.


The Bombay High Court will hear the case next on November 10.