MUMBAI: The Bombay High Court on Thursday questioned the Maharashtra police over its decision not to name Rajya Sabha MP Parth Pawar as an accused in the controversial Pune land deal case despite the Nationalist Congress Party (NCP) leader holding a 99% stake in the company that bought a government land parcel in the upscale Mundhwa area at a heavily discounted price.
Date also assured the court that his office would monitor the investigation and make all necessary efforts to ensure that the Pune police vigorously pursue all available leads. Apart from Yewale, the police have so far named Digvijay Patil, suspended sub-registrar Ravindra Taru, and power-of-attorney holder Shital Tejwani as the accused in the first information report and the subsequent charge sheet. Addressing Maharashtra director general of police (DGP) Sadanand Date orally, a single-judge bench of justice Madhav Jamdar said, “Your stand as investigating officer is that the person who is having 99% shareholding is not responsible, and the one who is accused is the person having 1% shareholding. Is the person who is having 99% share, Parth Pawar, not a beneficiary of this transaction?
“In order to ensure comprehensive investigation against each of the named accused and other suspects, a detailed set of instructions have been issued to the Commissioner of Police, Pune City,” the DGP’s affidavit stated. Due to “the sensitivity of the matter and concerns expressed regarding the investigation,” the Pune police commissioner has also been instructed to review the investigation’s progress every week and submit a report to the DGP’s office after six weeks, the affidavit added.
The 1% shareholder the court referred to is Digvijay Patil, one of the prime accused in the case and a partner at Amadea Enterprises LLP, a Pune-based firm at the centre of the controversy. Parth Pawar, son of deputy chief minister Sunetra Pawar, owns 99% of the firm, but was omitted from the FIR. The court posed this question to Date while granting pre-arrest bail to Pune tehsildar Suryakant Yewale, who was named an accused in the case for allegedly misusing his official position to facilitate the controversial transaction. Yewale has denied any role in the transaction and claimed he was falsely implicated.
In his affidavit filed on September 24, DGP Date told the high court that following a “detailed scrutiny” of the investigation papers, “on certain points, there is definitely [a] need for more professional and detailed investigation”.
