Bombay High Court Rules Two Arrests of Businessperson Sheetal Tejwani Illegal
In a significant legal development, the Bombay High Court has provided partial relief to businessperson Sheetal Tejwani by declaring two of her arrests illegal due to procedural lapses by Pune police. The court quashed her arrests in cases registered at the Pimpri and Bavdhan police stations, ordering her immediate release, while simultaneously upholding her arrest in a separate FIR lodged at the Khadak police station in Pune city.
Procedural Failures Lead to Quashing of Arrests
Justice N J Jamadar, in an April 17 order, emphasized that the failure of Pune police to inform Tejwani of the grounds for her arrest rendered the arrests illegal. The court noted that in the cases registered at Bavdhan and Pimpri police stations, the grounds of arrest were not communicated to Tejwani as per legal procedure at the time of arrest or prior to her production in court. This critical omission violated constitutional safeguards, leading the High Court to declare these arrests unlawful.
Details of the Cases and Court Observations
The legal proceedings stem from multiple criminal cases involving Tejwani. The Khadak and Bavdhan police stations booked her in connection with alleged irregularities in a land deal involving a firm linked to Parth, son of late Deputy Chief Minister Ajit Pawar. Specifically, the Bavdhan case involved documents pertaining to 40 acres of land at Mauje Mundhwa, Pune, where Tejwani acted as a power of attorney holder in favor of Amedia Enterprises LLP for a consideration of Rs 300 crores. The court order noted that the State government was the holder of the subject land, and without any semblance of title, Tejwani and co-accused executed the instrument with intent to defraud.
Separately, the Pimpri police station registered offences against Tejwani in the Seva Vikas Cooperative Bank loan fraud case. After her initial arrest by Khadak police on December 3, 2025, authorities sought her custody in the Bavdhan police FIR related to a similar Mundhwa land deal, arresting her on December 16 last year after obtaining custody from prison. On January 3 this year, Pimpri police arrested her in the Seva Vikas bank case.
Court's Rationale for Quashing Arrests
The High Court held that in the Bavdhan case, the failure to furnish grounds of arrest was particularly egregious as it involved a transfer of custody. Justice Jamadar observed, "It is imperative to note that the failure to furnish the grounds of arrest to the nominated person deserves consideration through the prism of obtaining custody of the petitioner on the strength of a production warrant. It was essentially a case of transfer of custody." The court added that in such situations, mere intimation of arrest does not constitute effective compliance with Article 22(1) of the Constitution, which mandates that no person who is arrested shall be detained without being informed of the grounds for such arrest.
In the Pimpri case, the court found "clear non-compliance" by authorities, as the grounds of arrest were not served on Tejwani at least two hours before her production before the jurisdictional court, as required by law. The High Court also criticized the trial court for "not justified in downplaying the failure" of the investigators in these procedural aspects.
Upholding of Khadak Police Arrest
Contrastingly, the High Court dismissed Tejwani's plea challenging her arrest in the Khadak police station case, upholding its legality. The court noted that Tejwani understands Marathi, and it was only when she was produced before a magistrate that she raised an untenable claim about being unable to defend herself due to lack of understanding of Marathi. The grounds of arrest were furnished in the language she understood, making this arrest procedurally sound according to the court's assessment.
This ruling underscores the judiciary's commitment to upholding procedural safeguards in criminal proceedings, ensuring that arrests comply with constitutional mandates while addressing allegations of financial irregularities and fraud in high-profile cases.
