The Bombay High Court has granted relief to Pune-based builder Avinash Bhosale and his family by quashing a property attachment order worth ₹25 crore in a case linked to alleged irregularities involving Yes Bank and DHFL, according to a report by Sakal – Pune.
A division bench comprising Justice A. S. Gadkari and Justice Kamal Khata rejected the Enforcement Directorate’s contention that certain transactions involving Bhosale’s companies represented kickbacks or proceeds of crime. The court also set aside an order of the appellate tribunal constituted under the Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators Act, or SAFEMA, which had upheld the attachment.
The attached assets included land in Pune belonging to Samit Realty and a property in Nagpur belonging to Gauri Bhosale. Bhosale had challenged the attachment, while the Enforcement Directorate had filed a cross-appeal after the tribunal partly lifted the attachment. The High Court allowed Bhosale’s appeal and dismissed the agency’s cross-appeal.
The court held that transactions conducted through the formal banking system could not be treated as kickbacks solely on the basis of unsupported allegations. It observed that lending by a bank or financial institution, when undertaken within its commercial authority, is a business decision and cannot be classified as a kickback without evidence, the report said.
The Enforcement Directorate had alleged that Bhosale’s companies received ₹164.64 crore in illicit funds. The court rejected the claim in relation to several transactions cited by the agency. These included a ₹237.50-crore investment made by Nibodh Realty in a company owned by Sanjay Chhabria during 2014-15 and its repayment under an earlier agreement.
The court also found that consultancy fees amounting to ₹47.52 crore had been paid before the 2018 disbursement of a Yes Bank loan, making it difficult to connect the two transactions on the facts reported. Money received from the sale of ABIL Dairy was also treated as part of a valid commercial agreement executed in 2016.
The case also involved a ₹600-crore loan provided by DHFL to Duit Urban Ventures, a company linked to the family of Yes Bank founder Rana Kapoor. The Enforcement Directorate had argued that the loan was a kickback for funds extended by Yes Bank and should therefore be treated as proceeds of crime. The High Court rejected that argument as well, according to the report.
The ruling concerns the legality of the property attachment and the transactions examined in the proceedings. It does not, by itself, settle every issue that may arise in the wider Yes Bank and DHFL investigations. Senior advocate Abad Ponda appeared for Avinash Bhosale, while Special Public Prosecutor Prashant Mishra represented the Enforcement Directorate.
