04 March,2026 11:41 PM IST | Mumbai | mid-day online correspondent
The accused was arrested on May 20, 2025, and has been in judicial custody since then. Representational pic
A court in Mumbai has once again denied bail to Indian Police Service (IPS) officer Rashmi Karandikar's husband, Purushottam Chavan, in a high-profile cheating case involving over Rs 24 crore. The court noted that there is sufficient material on record indicating his involvement in the alleged crime.
Chavan is accused of swindling victims out of approximately Rs 24.78 crore by promising plots and flats at low prices under government quota. According to the police, he lured people with false assurances, creating a carefully planned scheme to cheat the public.
Chavan was arrested on May 20, 2025, and has been in judicial custody since then. His previous bail application had already been rejected in January 2026, following which he recently filed a fresh plea for bail, which was also dismissed by the additional chief judicial magistrate of Esplanade court, Abhijit Solapure, last week.
In the reasoned order made available on Wednesday, the magistrate highlighted that the charge sheet and other documents clearly show Chavan's involvement in the alleged crime. The court emphasised that granting bail is not automatic merely because a chargesheet has been filed. Other factors, such as the risk of influencing witnesses and victims, must also be considered, the court held.
"There is reasonable amount of material on record which shows the involvement of this accused in the alleged crime," stated the court, while rejecting the bail plea.
Chavan, through his lawyer, argued that keeping him in custody was unnecessary as the charge sheet had already been filed and the documentary evidence was collected. He also sought bail on medical grounds and referred to a recent bail granted by the Bombay High Court in a separate Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) case.
The prosecution, represented by the economic offences wing of Mumbai Police, opposed Chavan's bail plea, arguing that the offences were serious and the amount involved was significant.
Advocate Mohan Tekavde, representing the complainant, further explained that Chavan misrepresented himself as a government representative to cheat victims.
He added that Chavan not only cheated the public but also caused substantial loss to the state by forging government documents. Tekavde described the actions as part of a systematic, well-planned conspiracy involving deliberate cheating and fraud.
The court noted that the bail granted in the PMLA case was based on facts not applicable to this matter. Additionally, the magistrate found substance in arguments suggesting that Chavan might influence witnesses and victims, which could hinder the prosecution process.
After hearing all sides, the court concluded that Chavan cannot be granted bail solely because the charge sheet has been filed and dismissed his fresh application.
(With PTI Inputs)
