The main legal point established in the judgment is the failure of the developers to fulfill their obligations in a real estate project, leading to legal actions and the involvement of the finance company in a tripartite agreement.

ORDER

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicants, learned APP for State and learned counsel appearing on behalf of the interveners- complainants.

2. These applications, by consent of the parties, are heard together and disposed of by a common order.

3. The allegations pertain to failure on the part of the applicants to handover the flats in the project undertaken by the applicants with a promise to handover flats within the stipulated time. The complainants had parted with substantial consideration despite which the applicants who had undertaken to complete the project failed to do so and hence the allegations under sections 406, 420 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

4. Anticipatory Bail Application No. 2676 of 2019 is in respect of a complaint filed on behalf of eleven (11) flat purchasers. Likewise, Anticipatory Bail Application No. 2678 of 2019 arises out of a complaint filed on behalf of eleven (11) flat purchasers. The only difference in Anticipatory Bail Application No. 2678 of 2019 is that the applicants therein (developers), the complainants (flat purchasers) and the 'DHFL' (finance company) had entered into tripartite agreement, the loan which the 'DHFL' had sanctioned in favour of the borrowers/flat purchasers was to be repaid by the developers as well as the flat purchasers on certain terms and conditions stipulated in the tripartite agreement. It is alleged by the complainants that the developers failed to pay the EMIs due and payable by them, as a result 'DHFL' is recovering even developers' liability from the flat purchasers.

5. The First Information Report (FIR) was registered by the flat purchasers - complainants under Section 406, 420 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code against the present applicants and others on November 11, 2019 with the Mahatma Phule Police Station, Kalyan.

6. When the matter had appeared before this Court on December 6, 2019, the following order came to be passed granting interim protection to the applicants.

''Pending civil dispute (Arbitration Petition No.216 of 2019) fled and initiated by the flat purchasers, this Court on 14th March, 2019 appointed the Court Receiver. Order is at Page 154. Pending civil dispute, a group of flat purchasers filed the complaint and Crime No.I- 0528 of 2019 came to be registered with the M. Phule Police Station, Kalyan under Sections 420, 406 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2. The learned counsel for the applicant has pointed out that the flat purchasers (complainants) have also approached authorities under the RERA Act. Prima-facie, dispute is civil in nature.

3. In view of the facts aforesaid, in the event of arrest in Crime No.I-528 of 2019 and I- 551 of 2019 registered with M. Phule Police Station, Kalyan, applicant in both the applications shall be released on their executing PR bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- each with one or more sureties in the like amount.

4. Applicant shall report to the Investigating Officer as and when called.

Stand over to 21st January, 2020.'

7. Briefly stated, the applicants are the developers of the building project. The society in respect of which the project was undertaken comprised of 448 members. The applicants - developers took possession of the premises/flats which were in occupation of the 448 members of the society by promising redevelopment of the society and giving new flats with larger areas free of cost to the said 448 members.

8. So far as the complainants are concerned, on various dates from August 2015 onwards, they had entered into agreements of sale in respect of the flats to be constructed in the sale component building. The rehab component was meant for 448 members of the society. It is an allegation that despite the complainants having paid substantial sums of money and in some cases after obtaining loan from DHFL, the developers failed to complete the project with the time stipulated and hand over the sale component units to the respective flat buyers. The developer is not pro