Maharashtra Sadan Scam: Bombay High Court Quashes ED's Money Laundering Case Against Chamankar Brothers

In a major relief to the Chamankar brothers, one of the prime accused in the Maharashtra Sadan Scam case involving State Cabinet Minister Chhagan Bhujbal, the Bombay High Court on Tuesday (September 16) quashed the case lodged against them by the Enforcement Directorate (ED).

A division bench of Justices Ajay Gadkari and Rajesh Patil quashed the ED case lodged under the stringent Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) against Krishna and Prasanna Chamankar (both brothers) owning the KS Chamankar Enterprises, the contractor, who was accused of fraudulently obtaining the contract.

The bench noted that the initial case against the Chamankar brothers was lodged by the Anti Corruption Bureau (ACB) in 2015 for predicate offence, following which, the ED registered an ECIR in June 2015 under the PMLA law.

However, by an order passed on July 31, 2021, the special court for want of evidence, discharged Bhujbal and also the Chamankar brothers of the predicate offence, the judges noted, further adding that neither the State nor the ED challenged the said decision, which has now attained finality.

"The Petitioners have been discharged by the Trial Court from the predicate offence registered by the ACB, Mumbai Division, by its Order dated July 31, 2021 and the said Order has attained finality. In view thereof, according to us, the conclusion enumerated by the Supreme Court in the case of Vijay Madanlal Choudhary, squarely applies to the Petitioners and therefore the ECIR and the charge-sheet filed thereof, registered by the ED qua the Petitioners, deserves to be quashed and set aside," the judges said in the order.

Notably, the ACB had filed a case against Bhujbal and 15 others in 2015 regarding a slum re-development contract on RTO land to the firm - K S Chamankar Enterprises, without inviting tenders in 2005, when Bhujbal was the Public Works Department (PWD) Minister. The ACB alleged that Bhujbal's family received approximately Rs. 13 crore in kickbacks.

The prosecution strongly opposed the discharge applications. However, original complainant activist Anjali Damania was not allowed to intervene.

While discharging the developer and other co-accused, the court held that there was no prima facie material showing the meeting of the minds of all the public servants. The court had denied that it was illegal to hand over the project to the developer without inviting tenders.

Case

The ACB alleged that the builder got rights to develop a slum on RTO land in Andheri, with the condition that the Maharashtra Sadan in Delhi, an RTO building in Andheri and a guest house on Malabar Hill would be constructed in return.

The firm alleged entered into an agreement with another company for the work and later sold development rights of the RTO to a construction company.

Appearance:

Advocates Shreeyash Lalit and Shweta Rathod instructed by Elixir Legal Services appeared for the Petitioners.

Advocate Manisha Jagtap represented the ED.

Additional Public Prosecutor Mankunwar Deshmukh represented State.

Case Title: Krishna Shantaram Chamankar vs 'Union of India (Writ Petition 3400 of 2025)

Click Here To Read/Download The Judgment