SC Cancels Bhasin Bail Over Grand Venice Project
Top Court finds violation of bail conditions, failure to settle investors’ claims, and misuse of company funds in Grand Venice project case
The Supreme Court has cancelled the bail granted to Satinder Singh Bhasin in the multiple FIRs linked to the “Grand Venice” project. The Court held that he did not comply with the bail conditions, especially the direction to settle the claims of allottees. Justice Sanjay Karol delivered the judgment in Miscellaneous Application No. 239 of 2024 in Writ Petition (Crl.) No. 242 of 2019 and connected matters.
The case arose from a writ petition that Bhasin filed under Article 32 of the Constitution. Bhasin, a Director of Bhasin Infotech and Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., sought consolidation of several FIRs. These FIRs related to the alleged non-delivery of units, siphoning of funds, and other irregularities in the “Grand Venice” project.
On November 6, 2019, the Supreme Court granted bail to Bhasin on several conditions. It directed him to deposit ₹50 crore, avoid influencing witnesses, and make every effort to settle investors’ claims within six to eight months. The Court also allowed mediation. Later, it consolidated multiple FIRs into one proceeding.
However, several allottees later moved the Court for cancellation of bail. They alleged that Bhasin had failed to comply with these conditions.
Senior counsel Shyam Divan appeared for the petitioner. Several senior counsel, including Vipin Sanghi, Dhruv Mehta, Meenakshi Arora, and Gopal Sankaranarayanan, appeared for the allottees and other stakeholders. Atmaram N.S. Nadkarni appeared for UPSIDA. The IRP also made submissions before the Court.
The allottees and the IRP argued that Bhasin did not honour his settlement obligations. They alleged that he siphoned funds and breached the bail terms. They also claimed that he misused company funds to make the ₹50 crore deposit. On the other hand, the petitioner argued that he had tried to settle the disputes. He said outside factors, including regulatory and contractual issues, caused the delay.
The Court observed that it had granted bail in 2019 mainly to facilitate settlement of investors’ claims. Yet those claims remained largely unresolved even after several years. The Court said there was “no genuine or bona fide effort” to settle the claims and found that the petitioner kept deflecting responsibility.
The Court also found that several allottees shown as “settled” had not actually received compliance with the settlement terms. In addition, it noted serious allegations of mismanagement. These included siphoning of funds and continued control over company affairs despite the insolvency proceedings.
On the ₹50 crore deposit, the Court held that the petitioner breached the bail condition. It found that he sourced the money from company accounts and related entities without complying with Section 185 of the Companies Act, 2013. The Court stressed that it had imposed the deposit condition on the petitioner in his personal capacity and expected bona fide compliance.
The Court further noted that the project remained incomplete. Essential facilities were still missing, and the claims had not seen any effective resolution. It described the petitioner’s conduct as “most undesirable” and said it clearly showed non-compliance with the bail conditions.
In view of these findings, the Supreme Court held that Bhasin had failed to comply with the bail conditions “both in letter and spirit.” It therefore cancelled the bail granted to him.
The Court also considered forfeiture of at least 50% of the deposited amount under the original bail conditions. At the same time, it stressed the need to protect the interests of the allottees. It further indicated that the trial should proceed expeditiously so that the matter reaches closure.
Additionally, the Court constituted an independent committee comprising Justice Deepak Gupta (Retd.) and Senior Advocate Rekha Palli (Retd. Judge). The committee will verify the list of allottees, assess the construction status, and help facilitate resolution of claims.
Accordingly, the Court allowed the miscellaneous applications and cancelled Bhasin’s bail.
