A Mumbai court has denied bail to Purushottam Chavan, husband of IPS officer Rashmi Karandikar, in a Rs 24.78 crore cheating case. The court cited strong evidence of his involvement and the risk of influencing witnesses
-1772639067490_d.png "Mumbai court denies bail to IPS officer Rashmi Karandikar’s husband in Rs 24 crore cheating case")
IPS officer Rashmi Karandikar. Pic/By Special Arrangment
A court 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 the government quota. According to the probe agency, he lured people with these 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, and he had recently filed a fresh plea for bail, which was also dismissed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate of the Esplanade court, Abhijit Solapure, last week.
Court’s reasoning for denial
In the reasoned order made available on Wednesday, the magistrate highlighted that the chargesheet and other documents clearly show Chavan’s involvement in the alleged crime. The court emphasized 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 stated, “There is reasonable amount of material on record which shows the involvement of this accused in the alleged crime,” while rejecting the bail plea.
Arguments presented by Chavan and the opposition
Chavan, through his lawyer, argued that keeping him in custody was unnecessary since the chargesheet 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.
Court observations
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 chargesheet has been filed and dismissed his fresh application.
(With PTI Inputs)
Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest news!" Click here!
