Click the Play button to listen to article
story

The Bombay High Court on Thursday (October 1) flagged that Parth Pawar, son of Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Sunetra Pawar and a Rajya Sabha MP, holds 99% stake in Ameida Enterprises LLP, which allegedly purchased a 40-acre government-owned land parcel in Pune's Mundhwa area at a price much lower than its actual value.The Court was informed that the Maharashtra Director General of...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
Please Subscribe for unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments, Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.

The Bombay High Court on Thursday (October 1) flagged that Parth Pawar, son of Maharashtra Deputy Chief Minister Sunetra Pawar and a Rajya Sabha MP, holds 99% stake in Ameida Enterprises LLP, which allegedly purchased a 40-acre government-owned land parcel in Pune's Mundhwa area at a price much lower than its actual value.

The Court was informed that the Maharashtra Director General of Police (DGP) has directed the Pune Police to carry out a further investigation into the case in a “detailed and professional” manner. The DGP has also stated that he will personally monitor the progress of the investigation.

The development comes after the High Court had earlier questioned why Pawar was not named as an accused in the case, despite the police having named Digvijay Patil, who holds only 1% stake in Ameida Enterprises LLP, as an accused.

On September 7, Justice Madhav Jamdar had directed the DGP to file a personal affidavit explaining why Pawar's name had not been added as an accused.

The case concerns allegations of irregularities in the purchase of the 40-acre government-owned land parcel in Mundhwa by Ameida Enterprises LLP.

The present proceedings arise out of an anticipatory bail application filed by Pune Tehsildar Suryakant Yewale, who has been named as an accused in the case for allegedly misusing his official position to facilitate the transaction. Yewale has denied having any role in the transaction and claimed that he has been falsely implicated.

Appearance:

Senior Advocate Harshad Nimbalkar along with Advocates Satyam Nimbalkar and Abhishek Arote appeared for the Petitioner.

Additional Public Prosecutor SV Gavand represented the State.

Advocates Shubhankar Kulkarni and Sandeep Dinkar Paigade represented other Respondents.

Advocate Atharva Bhingardeve represented thparth e Intervenor.

Case Title: Suryakant Gulabrao Yewale vs State (Anticipatory Bail Application 8 of 2026)

Tags: