No Bail for Suspended Tehsildars in High-Stakes Mundhwa Land Scam
Share- Nishadil
- December 23, 2025
- 0 Comments
- 3 minutes read
- 9 Views
Pune Court Rejects Anticipatory Bail for Lonkar, Shitole in Multi-Crore Land Fraud Case
A Pune court has denied anticipatory bail to two suspended tehsildars, Reshma Lonkar and Sandesh Shitole, embroiled in the significant Mundhwa land case. They stand accused of fraudulently transferring prime land, originally designated for project-affected persons, to private entities through an elaborate scheme involving forgery and misuse of power.
In a significant development for the ongoing investigation into the infamous Mundhwa land case, a Pune court has squarely rejected the anticipatory bail pleas of two suspended tehsildars, Reshma Lonkar and Sandesh Shitole. This decision, as you can imagine, marks a pivotal moment, essentially tightening the net around the officials who stand accused of orchestrating a rather audacious scheme involving forgery and the blatant misuse of their official positions.
The allegations leveled against Lonkar and Shitole are quite serious, centering on accusations that they colluded to forge documents, thereby facilitating the illicit transfer of a prime land parcel in Mundhwa. We're talking about 1.57 hectares, or roughly 3.8 acres, of incredibly valuable real estate. What makes this case particularly egregious is that this land, located at Survey No 4 in Mundhwa, was originally earmarked for Project-Affected Persons (PAPs) – individuals who had sacrificed their properties for public infrastructure projects.
To fully grasp the gravity of the situation, let's take a quick look back. This specific plot of land was acquired by the state government way back in 1974-75, specifically for the construction of the Yerawada-Kharadi road. Its original owner, a gentleman named Madhukar Balkrishna Shinde, along with his family, were officially declared as PAPs, entitling them to rehabilitation and, often, compensatory land. Fast forward several decades, and this critical land was allegedly diverted from its rightful beneficiaries.
The charges paint a picture of deliberate deceit. Lonkar and Shitole, holding key administrative posts during 2021-2022, are accused of exploiting their authority. Lonkar, it's alleged, moved ahead with the land transfer without so much as a nod to the proper, established procedures. Shitole, on the other hand, is said to have facilitated this whole messy affair by conveniently misinterpreting existing orders. The crux of their alleged misdeeds involves bypassing a crucial 1993 Supreme Court order and a 2012 state government circular – directives explicitly designed to safeguard the interests of project-affected families.
Once the land was, shall we say, 'freed up' from its original designation, it was reportedly sold off with surprising speed to various private individuals. This rapid transaction further raises eyebrows, suggesting a well-oiled plan to convert public-interest land into private profit. It's a classic case, really, where public trust is allegedly betrayed for personal gain.
The court, frankly, didn't mince words in its ruling. It noted that there was indeed a 'prima facie' case – strong initial evidence – suggesting a criminal conspiracy, blatant misuse of official power, and outright forgery. This kind of observation from the judiciary underscores the serious nature of the allegations and why the court felt it necessary to deny bail. The Pune City Police Economic Offences Wing (EOW) is diligently pursuing the investigation, with other individuals like Vilas Ananda Adhatrao and Sunil Baban Gaikwad also named as accused in this unfolding saga. The denial of bail means these officials will remain under scrutiny as the EOW continues to unravel the full extent of this alleged land scam.
Disclaimer: This article was generated in part using artificial intelligence and may contain errors or omissions. The content is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute professional advice. We makes no representations or warranties regarding its accuracy, completeness, or reliability. Readers are advised to verify the information independently before relying on