Pune Court Dismisses Developer Aniruddha Seolekar’s Plea for Discharge in Alleged Forgery Case
Pune Court Dismisses Developer Aniruddha Seolekar’s Plea for Discharge in Alleged Forgery Case
Pune, February 16, 2026: A sessions court in Pune has refused to discharge real estate developer Aniruddha Seolekar in a case involving allegations of forgery and cheating linked to the Florida Estate B Cooperative Housing Society in Mundhwa.
In an order dated February 12, 2026, Additional Sessions Judge A.I. Perampalli dismissed Seolekar’s criminal revision application, affirming a lower court’s decision that there is sufficient prima facie material to proceed with framing of charges. The court observed that, at this preliminary stage, the material placed on record by the complainant is adequate to justify continuing the trial.
The dispute concerns development and ownership rights over multiple survey plots in Mundhwa belonging to the housing society, which consists of 13 members. According to court documents, the members had initially granted development rights to Seolekar’s firm. Subsequently, seven more members reportedly assigned their rights to him. Construction was undertaken on the land, and flats were sold in accordance with approved plans.
The case stems from a complaint filed by the society through its chairman, Mukund Thipse. The complaint alleges that Seolekar falsified society records to create a separate body named “Florida Estate C Society” using a fabricated letterhead dated January 1, 2008. It further claims that he projected himself as an authorised signatory before the local revenue office to secure subdivision of the land and appropriate amenity spaces.
Seolekar’s counsel argued that the matter was essentially civil in nature and did not warrant criminal prosecution. The defence maintained that the trial court erred in declining discharge and failed to properly assess the evidence on record.
However, the sessions court noted similarities between the signature appearing on the disputed letterhead and the one on Seolekar’s vakalatnama submitted before the court. The judge emphasised that while considering whether to frame charges, the court must primarily evaluate the complainant’s material without conducting a detailed examination of the defence.
Seolekar will now face trial under Sections 468 (forgery for the purpose of cheating) and 471 (using a forged document as genuine) of the Indian Penal Code.
