Bombay High Court
Ramakant Subhash Jadhav And Anr vs State Of Maharashtra on 4 March, 2026
Author: A. S. Gadkari
Bench: A. S. Gadkari
ssm 1 54-wp3403.2023.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 3403 OF 2023
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION (STAMP) NO.19784 OF 2023
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION (STAMP) NO.19844 OF 2023
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4459 OF 2023
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4468 OF 2023
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4562 OF 2023
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 4470 OF 2023
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3180 OF 2024
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 460 OF 2026
Prabhuram Giri & Ors. .....Petitioners
Vs.
The State Of Maharashtra & Ors. .....Respondents
WITH
CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 1064 OF 2024
Ramakant Subhash Jadhav .....Applicant
Vs.
The State Of Maharashtra & Anr. .....Respondents
_____________________________________
Mr. Mahesh D. Tipari for Petitioners.
Mr. Ajay S. Patil, A.P.P. for Respondent-State.
Mr. Mihir Desai, Senior Advocate a/w Mr. Pavan Patil, Mr. Amit Bhatnagar
a/w Adv. Shubham Saraf and Mr. Tanmay Deshmukh for Applicant in
IA/3180/2024.
1/6
::: Uploaded on - 06/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 06/03/2026 22:13:48 :::
ssm 2 54-wp3403.2023.doc
Adv. Shyam Kapadia a/w Adv. Shivam Mehra and Adv. Shamkant Satya for
the Resolution Professional.
Mr. Amol Mhatre a/w Ms. Sonal Dabholkar for the Applicants in
IA/4468/2023 and IA/4562/2023.
Mr. Shankar S. Pawale, PI, CID, Konkanbhawan present.
_____________________________________
CORAM : A. S. GADKARI AND
KAMAL KHATA, JJ.
DATE : 4th MARCH, 2026. P.C.:- 1) The earlier orders passed in the present Petition are self-
explanatory. It is an admitted position on record that approximately 11,500 persons/investors have been systematically duped, and their monies have been misappropriated and defalcated by the Directors of Karrm Infrastructure Private Limited.
2) An Interim Application (Stamp) No.17109 of 2009 was filed by Neerkarrm Infrastructure Private Limited, proposing to take over the entire project and square off the liabilities of Karrm Infrastructure Private Limited.
3) On at least five earlier occasions, this Court has devoted considerable judicial time in attempting to facilitate a settlement and mediation, in the bona fide belief that the grievances and plight of the 11,500 affected flat purchasers/investors could be redressed. According to us, the said persons are in fact victims of the large scale organized crime committed by the Directors of Karrm Infrastructure Private Limited. 2/6 ::: Uploaded on - 06/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 06/03/2026 22:13:48 :::
ssm 3 54-wp3403.2023.doc Therefore, this Court with a view to bring an amicable solution and resolution to their plight has adopted various remedial measures which our earlier Orders would reflect.
4) Today, the Resolution Professional appearing in CP (IB) No.651/MB/2023 pending before the National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, sought to justify the delay in proceeding with the insolvency petition by raising several specious and untenable pleas, including the contention that, acceptance of the proposal placed by Mr. Desai, learned Senior Counsel appearing for Neerkarrm Infrastructure Private Limited, would result in a fait accompli.
5) We are unable to accept these submissions. The various orders passed by this Court in the present proceedings clearly reflect the circumstances and the consistent efforts made by this Court to address the grievances of the affected investors. We have been informed that, the corporate creditors before the NCLT, Mumbai are hardly 2/5 th of the total victims. It prima facie appears to us that, the Resolution Professional is unnecessarily raising technical issues in the Court's attempt to resolve the grievances and plights of the said 11,500 victims of the crime.
6) From the very inception, this Court has been attempting to find a workable resolution to the central issue involved in this Petition, namely the plight of approximately 11,500 gullible flat purchasers who invested their life savings with the legitimate expectation of securing a 3/6 ::: Uploaded on - 06/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 06/03/2026 22:13:48 ::: ssm 4 54-wp3403.2023.doc roof over their heads.
7) Unfortunately, the material on record indicates that the Directors of Karrm Infrastructure Private Limited have, in a systematic manner, duped the investors and defalcated substantial amounts collected from them.
8) The Supreme Court in Embassy Property Developments Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Karnataka, (2019) 13 SCC 308, has held that the existence of proceedings under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code does not denude the High Court of its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, particularly where issues of fraud, criminality, and larger public interest affecting a large body of investors arise.
9) Similarly, a co-ordinate bench of this Court in Tagore Nagar Shree Ganesh Krupa Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra, 2024 SCC OnLine Bom 2952 held as under:-
5. The second argument that militates against AA Estates is one that is purely in equity. What we have been told is that while AA Estates grinds its way through a CIRP, the result of which may be entirely uncertain and might well result in an order of liquidation rather than of a successful resolution plan, these society members cannot hope to see their redeveloped homes.
They can receive no transit rent. They must remain where they are. The IBC, we are told, and the corporate fortunes or misfortunes of AA Estates must prevail over the basic and fundamental rights of society members. Because AA Estate is trying to revive itself, society members must be without shelter and forced either into penury or, at the very least, to pay from their own pockets that which AA Estates was bound to pay and failed to pay.
4/6 ::: Uploaded on - 06/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 06/03/2026 22:13:48 :::
ssm 5 54-wp3403.2023.doc
6. As an even more absurd alternative, it is solemnly suggested that Truearth will continue paying transit rent but without any assurance that it will ever receive any benefits for the consideration that it is actually and financially bearing and paying.
7. This, we are sorry to say, is by no means an isolated case. In a city like ours there is precisely this widespread perversion of every concept of justice, equity and law. It is solemnly being argued that a statutory provision meant to protect or meant to revive the fortunes of companies can come at the cost of residents of the city and of persons who have without homes, shelter and without financial means to acquire temporary alternate accommodation. We will not accept this under any circumstances. Corporate resuscitation will not be permitted at the cost of individual city residents' rights to have a redeveloped home and to receive transit rent.
8. The Government itself is alive to this situation. It has taken policy decisions in that regard. We need not visit those at this stage.
9. AA Estates itself is no stranger to this either. It has taken precisely this argument in an even more dramatic scenario, that of the collapse of an entire building called Govinda Tower many decades ago in 1998. AA Estates was before us as a Respondent in Interim Application (L) No 26072 of 2022 that we disposed of by our order and judgment dated 13 th December 2023, reported as Nagesh Madhava Surana v. State of Maharashtra. We dealt with precisely these submissions including the question of vested rights if any in AA Estates, Section 14 of the IBC and the consideration of justice and equity inter alia from paragraph 43 onwards. Even there it was argued that possession could not be resumed because of a particular judgment of the Supreme Court. We addressed that question as well.
10. This case is on an identical footing. There is no material distinction at all. The only perhaps difference there was that the Interim Application sought leave of this Court to appoint a developer because there AA Estates had been appointed pursuant to an order of a Court on certain consent terms. Otherwise, there is no material distinction."
11. There are also, and even in this law is well settled, those cases where an interim relief that is a substantial replication of a 5/6 ::: Uploaded on - 06/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 06/03/2026 22:13:48 ::: ssm 6 54-wp3403.2023.doc final relief can be granted if the circumstances so warrant. In other words, there is no prohibition on a court and especially not on a writ court in fashioning an appropriate interim relief where the surrounding circumstances urgently demand it.
(Emphasis added)
10) Considering that this Court is monitoring the investigation and the remedial process and has been attempting to resolve the issues by exercising its constitutional jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, it would be appropriate, in the interest of justice, that the proceedings pending before the National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai in CP (IB) No.651/MB/2023 are kept in abeyance for the present.
11) Accordingly, the National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, is directed not to proceed further with CP (IB) No.651/MB/2023 until further orders of this Court.
12) The learned APP seeks time to obtain instructions.
13) At the request of the learned APP, stand over to 7th March 2026.
(KAMAL KHATA, J.) (A.S. GADKARI, J.) 6/6 ::: Uploaded on - 06/03/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 06/03/2026 22:13:48 :::