MUMBAI: The Session Court has granted anticipatory bail to developer Munaf Vadgama and is four kin accused in a cheating and criminal breach of trust case linked to a redevelopment dispute in Mazgaon.The additional Session judge Avinash P. Kulkarni, while allowing anticipatory bail directed that Sajida Munaf Vadgama, Aslam Ismail Merchant, Munaf Kadar Vadgama, and Tausif Hanif Shaikh be released on bail in the event of arrest in connection with registered at Sir J. J. Marg Police Station.The case was registered under Sections 406 and 420 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code following a complaint filed by Julie Coelho, who alleged that a partnership firm, M/s Aafiyah Realtors, had failed to provide a promised alternate shop premises after redeveloping a building at Dimtimkar Road, Nagpada.According to the complaint, the original tenant of the shop, the late Antonia Coelho, had executed agreements with the developer for redevelopment in return for a permanent alternate premises of about 350 sq ft and rent for temporary accommodation. However, despite completion of the building, the promised shop was allegedly not handed over.The complainant also alleged that the accused had offered a one-time settlement of ₹1.10 crore and issued post-dated cheques, which were later dishonoured due to insufficient funds.During the hearing, the defence argued that the dispute was essentially civil in nature and related to surrender of tenancy rights. They contended that the original tenant had executed a deed of surrender and received substantial payments from the developer over several years.The court observed that documents placed on record indicated payments totalling about ₹59.59 lakh made in multiple instalments to the complainant’s family, and noted that custodial interrogation of the accused did not appear necessary.The court granted pre-arrest bail subject to conditions, including executing a bond of ₹20,000 each and appearing before the investigating officer at the police station every Monday for three months or until filing of the chargesheet. The accused were also directed not to tamper with evidence or influence witnesses.
