‘99% Stakeholder Not a Beneficiary?’: Bombay HC Questions Police Over Parth Pawar’s Role in Mundhwa Land Deal

Mumbai, October 2, 2026: The Bombay High Court has questioned the Maharashtra police's investigation into the controversial Mundhwa land deal, asking why NCP Rajya Sabha MP Parth Pawar, who holds a 99% stake in the company involved in the transaction, was not treated as a beneficiary or named as an accused.

Justice Madhav Jamdar raised the question while hearing an anticipatory bail plea filed by suspended Pune city tehsildar Suryakant Yewale. The court ultimately granted Yewale pre-arrest bail while also taking note of the state government's decision to conduct a more detailed investigation.

What did the Bombay High Court ask?

During the hearing, the court questioned the investigating officer's position that a person holding 99% of the shares was not responsible, while another individual with a 1% stake had been named as an accused.

Justice Jamdar asked whether Parth Pawar, who holds 99% of the shares in Amadea Enterprises LLP, was not a beneficiary of the transaction. The observation was part of the court's questioning of the investigation and does not itself establish criminal liability against Pawar.

Pawar has not been named as an accused in the case, while fellow director Digvijay Patil, who holds a 1% stake, has been named as an accused, according to court records and reports on the hearing.

What is the Mundhwa land case?

The case concerns a 40-acre parcel of land in Pune's Mundhwa area. According to the FIR and submissions before the court, the property was classified as Mahar Watan land and had been leased to the Botanical Survey of India.

The prosecution alleges that the land was sold to Amadea Enterprises LLP for around ₹300 crore, despite the property being valued at a substantially higher amount. Reports citing the case proceedings have put the land's value at around ₹1,800 crore and said the transaction also involved an alleged ₹21 crore stamp-duty exemption.

The FIR further alleges that the transaction took place without the mandatory approval of the state government.

Police say further investigation is needed

The issue of Pawar's absence from the list of accused had already come before the High Court in September.

In an affidavit submitted to the court, Maharashtra DGP Sadanand Date said that a detailed review of the investigation papers indicated the need for a “more professional and detailed investigation.” The Pune police commissioner was subsequently directed to oversee further investigation into the matter.

The September 7 court order records a submission that Parth Pawar had not been made an accused because he was allegedly “very highly influential” and was the son of the state's deputy chief minister. That was recorded as a submission before the court, rather than a judicial finding that this was the reason for the police decision.

Tehsildar gets anticipatory bail

The High Court granted anticipatory bail to Suryakant Yewale, who was accused of allegedly misusing his official position in connection with the transaction.

Yewale has denied involvement and claimed he was falsely implicated. His lawyer argued that the administrative orders attributed to him could be challenged through legal proceedings and that the FIR did not allege that the orders were issued in return for illegal gratification.

Sale deed already cancelled by civil court

The disputed transaction has also faced proceedings before a Pune civil court. According to reports of the High Court hearing, the sale deed was cancelled by the civil court in July 2026.

The Bombay High Court's latest observations concern the scope and direction of the criminal investigation, rather than a finding that Parth Pawar committed an offence. The court's question about his 99% stake is part of its scrutiny of why the investigation treated the various individuals differently.