Mumbai: In partial relief to businessperson Sheetal Tejwani, Bombay High Court held that failure of Pune police to inform her of the grounds of her arrest rendered her arrest illegal. The HC quashed her arrests in two separate criminal cases by Pimpri and Bavdhan police stations as illegal and ordered her immediate release, but upheld her arrest in an FIR lodged at the Khadak police station in Pune city, dismissing her plea, which claimed she was illegally detained.The Khadak police arrested Tejwani, 44, on Dec 3, 2025. The grounds of arrest in the two cases, registered at Bavdhan and Pimpri police stations, were not communicated to her as per procedure at the time of arrest or prior to her production in court, said Justice N J Jamadar in an April 17 order in separate petitions. The HC also said the trial court was “not justified in downplaying the failure” of the investigators.The Khadak and Bavdhan police stations booked Tejwani in connection with alleged irregularities in a land deal involving a firm linked to the late deputy chief minister Ajit Pawar’s son Parth. Pimpri police station registered offences against her in the Seva Vikas Cooperative Bank loan fraud case. After Khadak police arrested her, police sought her custody in the Bavdhan police FIR related to a similar Mundhwa land deal and arrested her on Dec 16 last year after obtaining her custody from prison. On Jan 3 this year, Pimpri police arrested her in the Seva Vikas bank case. In the Bavdhan case, the HC was informed that on Feb 20, 2025, documents pertaining to 40 acres of land at Mauje Mundhwa, Pune, through Tejwani as a power of attorney holder in “favour of Amedia Enterprises LLP for a consideration of Rs 300 crore.” “It transpired that the State govt was the holder of the subject land. Yet, without there being any semblance of title, the petitioner—Tejwani—and the co-accused, with intent to defraud, executed the instrument…” the court order noted. The HC, however, said grounds of arrest were not disclosed to her and observed, “It is imperative to note that the failure to furnish the grounds of arrest to the nominated person deserves consideration through the prism of obtaining custody of the petitioner on the strength of a production warrant. It was essentially a case of transfer of custody,” declaring Tejwani’s arrest in the Bavdhan police FIR illegal.The HC added, “In a situation of the present nature, where the petitioner’s custody was transferred from one crime to another while the petitioner continued to be detained, the mere intimation of arrest would not be an effective compliance with the mandate under Article 22(1) of the Constitution.” The HC in the Pimpri case held there was “clear non-compliance” by the authorities, as the grounds of arrest were not served on the petitioner at least two hours before her production before the jurisdictional court. In the Khadak case, the HC said she understands Marathi, and it was not until she was produced before a magistrate that she raised an untenable claim that she was unable to defend herself due to lack of understanding of Marathi, as grounds of arrest were not furnished in the language she understood.
