Archive · 29 Aug 2026
Thane Court Rejects Bail in Alleged MHADA Flat Fraud Case
A man wanted to buy a flat in a MHADA project in Mira Road.
Police say Latif Shantvan Rajguru and two others took ₹8.5 lakh from him.
They allegedly used made-up documents to support the promise.
The flat was not given, and the money was not returned.
Rajguru asked the court for protection from arrest.
His lawyer said he only handled ₹2 lakh for another accused and did not keep the money.
Prosecutors said he was connected to the alleged fraud and had previous criminal cases.
The court said investigators needed to question him personally and refused his request for anticipatory bail.
The Thane Sessions Court rejected Latif Shantvan Rajguru’s anticipatory bail application.
He is accused of helping cheat a man of ₹8.5 lakh over a promised MHADA flat.
The prosecution alleges that fabricated documents bearing officials’ signatures were used in the scheme.
Rajguru’s defence said ₹2 lakh passed through his account at a co-accused’s request and that he cooperated with police.
The court cited prima facie evidence, the need for personal interrogation, and undisclosed criminal antecedents.
- Who
- Latif Shantvan Rajguru, along with two other accused, is accused in the case; the complainant allegedly paid ₹8.5 lakh.
- What
- The Thane Sessions Court rejected Rajguru’s application for anticipatory bail in an alleged flat fraud and document fabrication case.
- When
- The order was passed on August 28, 2026; the case was reported on August 29, 2026.
- Where
- The alleged transaction concerned a MHADA project in Shantinagar, Mira Road (East), and the FIR was registered at Nayanagar police station.
- Why
- The court found prima facie material, considered personal interrogation necessary, and noted alleged suppression of criminal antecedents.
Defence Position
Prosecution and Court Position
Rajguru’s role
Defence Position
The defence said Rajguru was implicated because he was a friend of co-accused Abdul Sattar and was not a beneficiary of the money.
Prosecution and Court Position
The prosecution said ₹2 lakh from the alleged transaction was credited to Rajguru’s account and alleged that he participated in document fabrication.
Investigation and arrest
Defence Position
The defence said Rajguru had already appeared before police and cooperated with the investigation.
Prosecution and Court Position
The court held that his personal interrogation was necessary and found the case unsuitable for anticipatory bail.
Criminal antecedents
Defence Position
Rajguru’s affidavit described his criminal antecedents as nil.
Prosecution and Court Position
The prosecution identified previous cases involving alleged cheating, forgery, and related offences; the court considered the alleged non-disclosure relevant.
- Accused
- Latif Shantvan Rajguru
- Amount alleged
- ₹8.5 lakh
- Promised property
- A flat in a MHADA project in Shantinagar, Mira Road (East)
- FIR location
- Nayanagar police station
- Court
- Thane Sessions Court
- Judge
- Additional Sessions Judge B.D. Shelke
- Order
- Anticipatory bail rejected
- Amount credited to Rajguru’s account
- ₹2 lakh, according to the defence and prosecution account of the transaction