In a criminal writ petition filed before the Bombay High Court seeking a declaration that the petitioner’s arrest by the Directorate of Enforcement (ED) was illegal, a Division Bench of Chief Justice Shree Chandrashekhar and Justice Gautam A. Ankhad held the arrest to be illegal and set aside the remand orders while directing the petitioner to be released.
The petitioner was an accused in the First Information Report (FIR), registered based on a written complaint dated 03-09-2024 for commission of offences under Sections 120-B read with 201, 420, 467, 468, and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PC Act). It was alleged that the Indian Renewable Energy Development Agency Limited (IREDA) sanctioned a loan of Rs. 80 crores to the Broadcasting Engineering Consultants India Limited (BECIL) for the execution of projects regarding waste management, LED smart lighting, and other projects.
An agreement was executed between the BECIL and M/s. The Green Billions Limited (TGBL), Mumbai, for Pune Municipal Solid Waste Management works. TGBL was led by the petitioner, and it was alleged that an amount of Rs. 50 crores from the loan amount had been utilised by the petitioner for his personal use.
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) arrested the petitioner on 24-03-2025, and he was released on bail by an order dated 04-08-2025 by the Special Judge. The ED alleged that sufficient material had been collected to conclude that the petitioner was guilty of money laundering.
Regarding confronting the petitioner with statements of other persons allegedly involved in money laundering, the Court indicated that a so-called confrontation could be conducted even if the petitioner was not arrested. The Court noted that the ED had not alleged that the petitioner was uncooperative and stated that the ground for arrest to trace the diverted funds was irrelevant. It was further noted that in the order by the CBI Court, it had been recorded that nothing had been recovered and that no money was seized from the petitioner to establish the money trail.
The Court opined that the IO had exercised the powers of arrest in an illegal manner, as there was no justifiable reason for arresting the petitioner. It was said that the IO had attempted to provide false reasons to believe. Thus, the Court held that the petitioner’s arrest was illegal and set aside the remand orders dated 06-01-2026 and 09-01-2026.
Lastly, the petitioner was directed to be released upon filing an affidavit with the court concerned and to refrain from tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses, and to submit his passport to the court concerned.
Appearances:
For Petitioner – Mr. Adithya Iyer, Mr. Advait Helekar, Mr. Veertej Patil, Mr.Vijit Shinde, Mr. Jayesh Bhosale
For Respondents – Dr. Nilesh V. B. Pawaskar, Ms. Aparna D. Vhatkar, Ms.Mitalee M. Gaikwad, Mr. S. V. Gavand (APP)
