Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has declared the arrest of builder Lalit Tekchandani in three separate FIRs for allegedly duping flat purchasers in a Navi Mumbai housing project as “illegal” and “invalid.”
A bench of Justices Bharati Dangre and Manjusha Deshpande ordered his release, stating that the failure to communicate the grounds of arrest violated his fundamental rights under Articles 21 and 22 of the Constitution.
The first FIR was lodged by Chembur police on January 15, 2024, on a complaint by a homebuyer under various provisions of the Indian Penal Code, the Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act (MOFA), and the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors Act (MPID).
Tekchandani was arrested on January 30. Subsequent FIRs were registered at Taloja police station on January 15 and CBD Belapur police station on February 12, with arrests made on February 21 and April 12, respectively.
Tekchandani’s plea contended that in all three cases, the grounds for arrest were not communicated in writing, violating procedural safeguards. The state conceded that the grounds were not communicated during the first arrest but defended its actions in the subsequent arrests. However, the court found no evidence of adequate communication in the transfer warrants, describing them as mere “proforma.”
The bench emphasized the importance of communicating arrest grounds to ensure the accused can challenge the remand and seek bail. It noted, “Communication of ‘grounds of arrest’ is intended to enable an accused to know what material is in the hands of the Investigating Officer, justify his arrest, and oppose the remand.” The court added that failure to meet this requirement rendered both the arrests and subsequent remand orders “null and void.”
Tekchandani contended that the accusations stemmed from project delays, which he attributed to civil disputes pending before forums like the Consumer Court and RERA. He argued that these delays did not constitute criminal culpability.
Quashing the arrests and remand orders, the court ordered Tekchandani’s release without requiring bonds or sureties, stating: “Since the arrest of the Petitioner followed by the remand orders are found to be invalid in the eyes of law, they are quashed and set aside.” The court, however, directed that Tekchandani furnish a bail bond to the trial court, given that the chargesheet had already been filed.
