Bombay HC Refuses Ad-Interim Relief To Former Minister Eknath Khadse In 2016 Pune MIDC Land Deal Case

Bombay HC Refuses Ad-Interim Relief To Former Minister Eknath Khadse In 2016 Pune MIDC Land Deal Case

The Bombay High Court refused ad-interim relief to former minister Eknath Khadse, declining to stay the framing of charges against him and his family in the 2016 MIDC land deal case, and posted the matter for further hearing on January 21.

Urvi MahajaniUpdated: Thursday, January 15, 2026, 01:44 AM IST
article-image
Bombay High Court declines to stay framing of charges against former minister Eknath Khadse in the alleged MIDC land deal case | File Photo

Mumbai, Jan 14: The Bombay High Court has refused to grant ad-interim relief to former Maharashtra cabinet minister Eknath Khadse, who sought a stay on the framing of charges against him, his wife Mandakini Khadse, and son-in-law Girish Chaudhari in connection with a 2016 land deal.

Charges to be framed on January 16

The Special Court is scheduled to frame charges against them on January 16. The Special Court, on December 6, 2025, had rejected Khadse’s plea seeking discharge from the case.

Alleged MIDC land grab

The case relates to the alleged land grab of a plot in Bhosari, Pune, belonging to the Maharashtra Industrial Development Corporation (MIDC), which is stated to have caused a loss to the exchequer of up to Rs 61.25 crore.

Initially, the case was registered at the Bund Garden Police Station in Pune city on a complaint filed by activist Hemant Gawande. The case was later transferred to the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB).

Alleged undervaluation of land

It is alleged that Khadse purchased MIDC land in the name of his wife and son-in-law for Rs 3.75 crore, as against the market price of Rs 40 crore.

Political background noted

At the time of the alleged transaction, Khadse was a minister and a leader of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP); he is presently with the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) (Sharad Pawar faction).

Parallel probes underway

Two parallel proceedings have arisen from the same FIR — one being investigated by the ACB and the other by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA).

Defence seeks interim protection

Khadse’s advocate urged the court to grant ad-interim protection or direct the prosecution to make a statement that it would not press for the framing of charges on January 16.

He contended that if charges were framed, the petitions challenging the discharge order would become infructuous, necessitating further amendments.

State declines assurance

However, Public Prosecutor Mankunwar Deshmukh, representing the State in the ACB case, declined to give such an assurance, stating that she had no instructions. She sought time to go through the petition.

Also Watch:

Delay flagged by court

Justice Ashwin Bhobe termed the delay as unexplained, noting that the Special Court’s order was passed in December 2025, while Khadse approached the High Court only on January 3.

Notice issued to ED

The High Court issued notice to the ED and kept the matter for hearing on January 21.

To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/