Bombay High Court Calls For Strict Action Against Developers Constructing Illegal Buildings; Denies Anticipatory Bail To Developer
Calling for a 'stringent action' against developers proceeding with construction projects without mandatory approvals, which leads to frauds, the Bombay High Court recently denied anticipatory bail to a developer booked for usurping a man's ancestral property and constructing an illegal building over it and further selling flats to individual purchasers by forging...
Calling for a 'stringent action' against developers proceeding with construction projects without mandatory approvals, which leads to frauds, the Bombay High Court recently denied anticipatory bail to a developer booked for usurping a man's ancestral property and constructing an illegal building over it and further selling flats to individual purchasers by forging mandatory permissions.
Single-judge Justice Rajesh Laddha said in such cases, custodial interrogation is crucial as even some civic officials often connive with such fraud developers to commit fraud.
"The growing prevalence of unapproved construction projects entails a wide range of fraudulent behaviours, including bypassing safety norms, using substandard materials, obtaining spurious permissions, or misrepresenting the legal status of the construction project. These actions directly impact the landowner and flat buyers, posing a serious legal and financial risk. There are also attempts to legitimise these illegal activities through registering sale agreements or regularising the project by paying premiums to the Corporation. Such acts affect the public at large, necessitating the imposition of stringent action on erring individuals," Justice Laddha said in the order passed on October 9.
In the present case, at first glance, the judge said that records indicate the applicant's involvement in the crime and raise questions about the Kalyan - Dombivli Municipal Corporation's (KDMC's) role in allowing the unauthorised buildings to stand for many years.
"A thorough investigation is necessary to uncover the circumstances surrounding the building's construction and prolonged unauthorised status. In cases of such nature, custodial interrogation is crucial to unearth the fraud in all its facets," the judge observed.
The judge further opined that the investigation is at a nascent stage and the applicant has criminal antecedents of a similar nature and thus, his release on pre- arrest bail would jeopardise the course of an effective investigation.
Background:
According to the complainant, he had 34 Gunthas of land parcel at Thane's Dombivli area and after the demise of his father, the applicant Mayur Bhagat, being the proprietor of M/s Shree Swastik Homes, usurped the land and began illegal construction thereon. It is alleged that Bhagat obtained forged and fabricated construction permissions from the relevant authorities and built the Radhai Complex and six buildings on the informant's ancestral property. The units in these structures were then sold to individual flat purchasers through registered sale deeds. The complainant made several complaints to various authorities since May 2020, however, it was only in March 2021, the civic body declared the construction illegal and orders its demolition.
Despite the demolition orders, the construction went on and the applicant even sold flats to various purchasers, following which the complainant filed a writ petition before the High Court, which disposed of the plea by a detailed order on July 5, 2024. From this order, Justice Laddha noted that the KDMC was to demolish the structures by July 16.
"However, on that day, the demolition process was hindered due to political influence, as a large mob gathered at the site. The informant filed the present FIR on July 18, 2024 as a last resort. Further, the orders passed in the Writ Petition reveal that the illegal construction was finally demolished in September 2024. From these events, it transpires that the informant took necessary steps at all material times but faced difficulties due to the casual approach of the Municipal Corporation," the judge noted.
While the Corporation acknowledges not issuing construction permits to the applicant, it remained silent for years together and allowed the applicant to continue his wrongdoing until the Division Bench of this Court intervened in July 2024. This in itself suggests that the applicant, in connivance with the officials, has managed to stay out of trouble since 2020, the bench noted.
With these observations, the judge refused to grant anticipatory bail to the developer.
Appearance:
Advocates Aniket Vagal and Kunal Pednekar appeared for the Applicant.
Additional Public Prosecutor MG Patil represented the State.
Advocate Sapna Krishnappa represented the Flat Purchasers.
Case Title: Mayur Ravindra Bhagat vs State of Maharashtra (Anticipatory Bail Application 2566 of 2024)
Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Bom) 575