Why Deputy CM’s Son Not Named in Mundhwa Land Deal FIR: Bombay High Court Questions Probe
Mumbai/Pune, 11th December 2025: The Bombay High Court on Wednesday questioned the direction of the police probe in the Mundhwa land deal case while hearing a pre-arrest bail plea filed by real estate developer Sheetal Tejwani, currently in custody in a related investigation.
During the proceedings, the court noted that the son of the deputy chief minister had not been named in the case and asked whether the investigation was overlooking his role while scrutinising others.
Tejwani had approached the court seeking protection from arrest in a second FIR registered on November 6 at Bavdhan police station, which also pertains to alleged irregularities in the Mundhwa land transaction.
She is already under arrest in the FIR filed at Khadak police station on November 7 regarding the ₹300-crore sale of the 40-acre plot.
The Economic Offences Wing (EOW) of Pune Police had taken her into custody on December 3 after establishing that she held the power of attorney for the disputed Mundhwa land, which was sold earlier this year to Amadea Enterprises, a company where Parth Pawar, son of Deputy Chief Minister Ajit Pawar, holds 99% shares. His partner Digvijay Patil has been named in the FIR as his signature is on the land transaction. Tejwani has been remanded to police custody till December 11.
During the hearing, Justice Madhav Jamdar remarked that the FIR does not mention the deputy chief minister’s son. “If the name does not appear in the complaint, then is the investigation selectively targeting only a few individuals? The deputy chief minister’s son is not named in the FIR. Is the police protecting the son of the deputy CM and only investigating others?” the judge asked orally.
A police official later said Parth Pawar had not been named because his name was not reflected in any of the documents examined so far. The Mundhwa land, originally granted as hereditary land, was under government control and leased to the Botanical Survey of India. The central issue under scrutiny is whether the sale received the mandatory approvals from the state government.
Senior counsel Rajiv Chavan, representing Tejwani, argued that the second FIR does not disclose any offence and claimed she had acted solely as the power of attorney holder for the lawful owners. He further said that with the EOW already investigating the same transaction in the earlier FIR, the second FIR was “unnecessary and oppressive.”
Opposing the plea, acting public prosecutor M. M. Deshmukh sought its dismissal, contending that Tejwani had moved the High Court immediately after seeking similar relief before a Pune court on December 8, which had scheduled the hearing for December 15. “The manner in which she has approached multiple courts amounts to misuse of legal remedies,” he argued.
Justice Jamdar then signalled that the court was considering imposing costs of ₹5 lakh before any order could be passed. Following this observation, Tejwani’s counsel opted to withdraw the petition, and the High Court allowed the withdrawal without issuing any directions.
Meanwhile, speaking to reporters, Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis said the state government had maintained from the start that no individual would be shielded in the Pune land deal investigation, including those linked to political figures. “I haven’t seen what the High Court has said today, but whatever the court has sought will be placed before it,” he said. “Our position has always been clear — no one will be protected, and action will be taken against whoever is found guilty.”
The High Court’s observations have added fresh scrutiny to the high-profile case, which continues to see multiple legal and political developments as the investigation progresses.
