SC Cancels Satinder Singh Bhasin’s Bail in Grand Venice Mall Scam Case
2 April 2026 6:32 PM IST2 April 2026 6:32 PM IST
Insolvency proceedings were invoked against Bhasin's companies under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
Supreme Court (DC File Photo)
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday set aside the bail granted to businessman Satinder Singh Bhasin in connection with a multi-crore rupee alleged Grand Venice Mall scam in Greater Noida and directed him to surrender before the jail authorities within a week.
A bench comprising Justices Sanjay Karol and N K Singh cancelled Bhasin's bail as he failed to settle the claims of the flat allottees, and also for siphoning off Rs 50 crore from the funds of Bhasin Infotech and Infrastructure Private Limited (BIIPL) for deposit as bail condition despite the court's direction that the said amount should be from his personal account.
"The petitioner has not complied with the conditions of bail imposed upon him vide order dated November 6, 2019. Resultantly, the bail granted to the petitioner is cancelled. The petitioner to surrender within one week from the date of this judgment," the bench said.
The order came on a batch of petitions filed by allottees of the 'Grand Venice' project, seeking cancellation of bail granted to Bhasin due to violations of certain bail conditions that were imposed upon him.
The top court directed that Bhasin may apply for regular bail afresh after a period of twelve months, subject to fully complying with the orders passed in the insolvency proceedings.
Insolvency proceedings were invoked against Bhasin's companies under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
"It is directed that the passport of the petitioner is not to be released by the trial court without the leave of this court," the bench said.
The apex court also forfeited Rs 50 crore plus the accrued interest deposited by Bhasin as part of the bail condition.
"We direct that out of the aforesaid amount, Rs 5 crore plus proportionate accrued interest be transmitted to the National Legal Services Authority for its utilisation in achieving its objectives.
"The remaining amount, along with proportionate accrued interest, be transmitted to the IRP for the purposes of the IBC proceedings. The registrar (judicial) of this court to ensure immediate compliance by the concerned trial court in disbursal of the above amounts," the bench said.
In its judgment spanning 103 pages, the apex court noted that Bhasin was directed to pay Rs 50 crore in his individual capacity for bail but he had siphoned off the funds from his company.
"Upon a consideration of the submissions and the breakup as filed by the petitioner himself, it cannot be disputed that the amount of Rs 50 crore has originated from the funds of Bhasin Infotech and Infrastructure Private Limited and other related entities.
"We are inclined to agree with the submissions advanced by the respondents. The condition requiring a deposit as a prerequisite for grant of bail was imposed upon the petitioner in his individual capacity. This condition required bona fide, if not strict, compliance," the bench said.
It said an alarming aspect is that no board resolution has been passed by BIIPL before disbursal of the amount to secure his bail.
"In the present case, it cannot be said that the loan to secure bail for the petitioner was connected to the company's principal business activities by any stretch of imagination.
"Therefore, the deposit of the amount through the purported loan taken by the petitioner from BIIPL in the absence of any documentary approval or compliance with statutory requirements of Section 185 of the Companies Act, 2013 cannot be sustained," the bench said, adding that not a single rupee has been invested from the personal funds of the petitioner.
On the allegation by allottees that the project is still not complete, the top court said the conduct of the petitioner is represented by the fact that at this stage, despite repeated attempts, there is a complete lack of essential information regarding the project.
"There is no clarity on the final number of allottees, the unit number that they have been allotted, the consideration paid and the dues remaining. In this situation, execution of tripartite lease deeds also seems improbable," the bench said.
It said the project is not in a condition where possession can be handed over to the allottees and Bhasin did not make genuine and meaningful efforts to settle the claims of the allottees.
"Despite the passage of time, a large number of allottees have neither received possession nor a refund. Even in cases where settlement agreements have been executed, the terms thereof have not been fulfilled. These agreements have remained largely on paper and not resulted in actual relief to the allottees," the bench said.
The top court had, in November 2019, granted Bhasin, the director of Bhasin Infotech and Infrastructure Private Limited, bail in these cases subject to various conditions.
Around 46 FIRs were registered against several people in connection with the alleged scam in which investors claimed that they were duped by the accused when handing over the plot of land.
The FIRs, registered in New Delhi and Uttar Pradesh, were filed by the allottees of units in the project against the petitioner, alleging non-delivery of their units, siphoning of their funds and impropriety in allotment of land with the collusion of state officials.
( Source : PTI )
Next Story