Maharashtra: Bombay HC grants relief to Param Bir ‘aide’ Navlani, quashes FIR against him in 2019 pub brawl case

Navlani had reportedly cited his connections with Param Bir Singh, the then director general of the ACB, to prevent Dange from taking action after his bar in south Mumbai was found to be operating beyond permissible hours.

The businessman had also approached the high court challenging the lookout circular (LOC) issued against him by the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) in connection with allegations of corruption levelled against former Mumbai police commissioner Param Bir Singh.

“For the reasons and in view of observations made, the present case is fit for exercising powers of this court, petition allowed in terms of prayer seeking to quash and set aside FIR,” a division bench of Justice Prasanna B Varale and Justice Shriram M Modak observed. The detailed judgement will be made available in due course.

The said incident took place on November 22, 2019, outside ‘Dirty Buns Sobo’, a pub owned by Navlani. Dange had alleged that even though it was late at night, Navlani refused to shut the pub and claimed to have good relations with Param Bir Singh.

Around the same time, a fight broke out in the elevator of the pub. When a police constable tried to intervene, the youths who were part of the fight allegedly assaulted the constable. Dange alleged that when he tried to arrest three persons involved in the brawl, Navlani stopped him from doing so.

In the FIR, Dange alleged that when his team came to the police station with the three accused, he started receiving calls from several police officers.

He said in the complaint that he found one of the three accused arrested by them was Yash Mehta, grandson of diamond merchant and film producer Bharat Shah. An FIR was then registered against Navlani, Mehta and others.

The Mumbai police had filed a chargesheet in the case in May, last year.

Senior advocate Aabad Ponda representing Navlani had argued that his client was falsely implicated under Section 353 of the IPC even though the CCTV footage of the incident was sufficient to exonerate him.

Ponda said that Navlani was simply talking to the official concerned on the day of incident and was not in quarrel with him or obstructing him or his colleagues from performing or discharging their official duties.

Chief public prosecutor Aruna Pai opposed the plea and sought it to be dismissed. The bench, during an earlier hearing, had prima facie remarked the officer (Dange) acted with “grudge” and his subsequent actions cannot be isolated and, therefore, the petitioner can be granted relief.

Navlani, along with Singh, is also under ACB probe based on a complaint filed by police officer Anup Dange, who had alleged that Singh had transferred him since Dange had not agreed to his demand of not naming Navlani in the FIR.

Dange had alleged that he was suspended when Singh became Mumbai CP, as he had not allowed Singh’s “close friend” Navlani to run his pub in south Mumbai beyond permissible time limits in 2019. Dange had also alleged that Singh later demanded Rs 2 crore to revoke his suspension.

Meanwhile, Shiv Sena MP Sanjay Raut had on February 15 named Navlani and alleged that he as well as three persons named Farid Shama, Romi Shama and Feroz Shama had “extorted Rs 300 crore from Mumbai’s 70 top builders on behalf of Enforcement Directorate officials.”