Saturday, 14 November 2026LatestVideosAboutContact
Latest
The role of social relationships in scaling agricultural innovations: A dimension that remains underreported in researchDelhi Cop's Son Opens Fire On Two Brothers In Faridabad Road Rage, One On VentilatorWTA Finals: Svitolina stuns Sabalenka to reach semifinals; Andreeva beats Shnaider to enter final fourDelhi AQI drops to 349, two monitoring stations remain in severe categoryHow art exhibitions provide unmatched experiences of aesthetics, scale and techniquePT Usha faces eligibility questions over Ice Hockey nomination for IOA electionsA 40-Year-Old Dharavi School Needs Its Land. This 19-YO Is Leading the Fight‘Mamata was put in Delhi prison van by Kali’s wrath’, says SuvenduBest geysers for Indian homes in winter 2026: 10 models with useful features for efficient heating and daily hot water needsIndia’s SRK paradox: Box office at home, dud in SENA countriesRoyal Enfield Posts Highest Ever Quarterly Bike Sales With 3.76 Lakh+ UnitsCartoon Today on November 14, 2026
NationalUpdated 3 hrs ago

Mumbai: MPID Court Rejects Anticipatory Bail Of Ahmedabad Advocate In Alleged MHIL Investment Fraud

Image: Free Press Journal

Mumbai, November 13, 2026: The designated MPID court has refused to grant anticipatory bail to 45-year-old Ahmedabad-based advocate Ruchita Kedia, whose role is being probed in an alleged investment fraud involving M.H. Infraprojects Ltd (MHIL) and its sister concern, Avishkar Buildcon LLP.

Alleged Forged Cancellation Deed

According to the prosecution, the companies involved had allegedly mortgaged the property to another company in 2017, and it was still mortgaged as security for debenture money. It was also alleged that the accused had produced a forged cancellation deed.

In these transactions, Kedia, who worked as a legal consultant for Avishkar Buildcon, is alleged to have frequently sent a soft copy of the said cancellation deed through WhatsApp to the mobile phone of accused No. 3, Neel Thakkar, director of MHIL.

Kedia, however, while seeking anticipatory bail, claimed in her defence that she was neither the maker nor the signatory of the document and had merely forwarded it through her WhatsApp account.

Prosecution Questions Mobile Phone Evidence

The prosecution, on the other hand, opposed her plea and said the Sub-Registrar's office in Ahmedabad had confirmed that no such cancellation deed was registered there. It further alleged that the mobile phone produced by the advocate was not the one used to forward the document.

The court noted that a draft of the allegedly forged cancellation deed was recovered from the drawer of the advocate's office table during a search. It was also observed that she had submitted a different mobile handset to the investigating officer instead of the phone allegedly used to forward the document.

Also Watch:

Mumbai Court Convicts Wadala Couple For Derogatory Slogans Against Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar, Awards Jail Terms

Court Says Custodial Interrogation Necessary

Rejecting her plea, the court also observed that the advocate's custodial interrogation was necessary to ascertain who prepared the forged document and where it was prepared. The court held that her conduct prima facie indicated complicity in the alleged offence and that she had not properly cooperated with the investigation.

To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/

This content is published by Free Press Journal and has not been created or edited by Hello Headlines. View original

More in National

See all