Bombay High Court Upholds Quashing Of Process Issued Against BJP's Mangal Prabhat Lodha In 2007 Cheating Case

The Bombay High Court on Monday (August 18) upheld an order passed by Magistrate in October 2008 quashing the process issued against BJP leader and Maharashtra's Cabinet Minister Mangal Prabhat Lodha in a 2007 case of alleged cheating and fraud with respect to development of certain properties in Thane district. 

Single-judge Justice Milind Jadhav found that the complaint filed by one Anjali Hajare against Lodha, who is also a developer, was not maintainable as at the most she could have initiated civil proceedings against her own business partners and not against Lodha. 

For context, Hajare and a few others had entered Into a partnership and started M/s. Harinam Enterprises and had entered into agreements in 1986 for purchasing several plots of land and had made partial payments—approximately 50 per cent of the consideration. However, the agreements to purchase the properties did not ultimately fructify for several years. Subsequently, three of the partners dealt with the properties and executed a Development Agreement dated April 1, 2003 with Lodha, excluding the Hajare and one more partner, who then alleged that these partners had effectively bypassed the partnership firm and deprived her and the other partner of their legitimate rights in the properties. She alleged that Lodha had colluded with the other partners and committed cheating and fraud.

A criminal complaint was therefore filed alleging offences under Sections 420 (cheating) and 406 (criminal breach of trust) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and the Magistrate issued process against the accused on December 13, 2007. However, Lodha then challenged the issuance of process before a sessions court which on October 7, 2008 allowed his revision plea and quashed the process issued against him. 

Challenging this order of the Sessions Court, Hajare moved the High Court but during the pendency of her plea, she died and the case was then pursued on her behalf by her husband Manohar Hajare. 

After going through the facts of the case, Justice Jadhav noted that Lodha obtained all the statutory permissions from the concerned authorities and the properties were developed by following the due procedure of law.  

"All these are therefore essentially civil disputes, if raised, qua the substantive rights of the parties in the said lands. Prima facie, when such facts are conceived there is no element of criminality whatsoever qua Lodha, when the entire development took place with open eyes. What prevented the Petitioner from approaching the Civil Court to protect her substantive rights can only be answered by her. At the highest, claim of original Petitioner that she is one of the partners qua the unregistered partnership firm for breach of any terms of the agreement can therefore lie only against the other partners, if any, and is in the nature of civil dispute. The original Complainants have no nexus with Lodha, therefore if breach of agreement of partnership firm is claimed then their remedy is to file civil suit against the other partners for settlement of accounts and most importantly injunction if interference is objected to by any partner," Justice Jadhav observed. 

The Revision Court returned specific findings that no element of cheating or breach of contract exists qua Lodha and nothing brought on record to show common intention and cheating by him.

Considering al these facts, the court upheld the order of the Sessions Court, which had quashed the process of issuance against Lodha. 

Appearance:

Senior Advocate Vishwajeet Kapse along with Advocate Pawan Tiwari appeared for the Petitioner.

Advocates Amogh Singh, Akash Gupta and Jeet Gandhi represented Lodha.

Additional Public Prosecutor Sangeeta Phad represented the State.

Case Title: Manohar Mahadeo Hajare vs Mangal Prabhat Gumanlal Lodha (Criminal Writ Petition 183 of 2009)

Citation: 2026 LiveLaw (Bom) 391

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment