Supreme Court Allows ACB Probe In ₹2,000-Crore Assets Case Against Former PMC Engineer
Supreme Court Allows ACB Probe In ₹2,000-Crore Assets Case Against Former PMC Engineer
Pune, April 22, 2026: The Supreme Court has declined to halt the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) investigation into an alleged disproportionate assets case worth ₹2,000 crore involving former Pune Municipal Corporation (PMC) city engineer Prashant Waghmare.
A bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kumar and Vinod Chandran permitted Waghmare to file a Special Leave Petition (SLP) but refused to grant any interim relief against the earlier ruling of the Bombay High Court. The apex court stated that there was no valid reason to interfere with the High Court’s decision and dismissed the petition.
The matter stems from an April 2, 2026 judgment of the Bombay High Court, which set aside a 2019 decision by the then PMC commissioner denying permission for an open inquiry into the allegations. The High Court had observed that the authority exceeded its mandate by evaluating the merits of the case at a preliminary stage, thereby obstructing the investigation process.
In its observations, the court clarified that provisions under Section 17A of the Prevention of Corruption Act cannot be used to block an inquiry into disproportionate assets. It further emphasised that administrative authorities do not have the power to conduct a detailed assessment of evidence while deciding whether an investigation should proceed.
The court also underlined the broader impact of corruption, noting that misconduct by public officials can harm the economy, weaken institutions, and damage the country’s reputation.
The case originated from a complaint filed by Tanaji Balasaheb Gambhire, who challenged the PMC commissioner’s 2019 orders rejecting approval for an inquiry. The complaint alleged that Waghmare had accumulated wealth far beyond his known sources of income, reportedly routing funds through family members and associates.
Waghmare, who joined the civic body in 1994 and later served as city engineer, was accused of amassing significant assets over the years. Following the complaint, an inquiry officer had sought permission to initiate an open probe, citing the seriousness of the allegations and limited cooperation during the preliminary stage.
However, the request was rejected by the then municipal commissioner, leading to the closure of the inquiry by the ACB in June 2019.
The complainant also claimed that attempts to obtain information under the Right to Information Act were unsuccessful due to confidentiality concerns.
With the Supreme Court declining to intervene, the ACB probe is now set to proceed in accordance with the High Court’s directions.
