RERA Complaint No Bar to FIR for Offences of Cheating & Investor Fraud under MPID Act
News in the Hindustan Times of 13.8.2026 and the Order dated 11.8.2026 of (HH Judge Vikram R. Jagdale Court Room No.7) the Designated Court under MPID Act, City Civil & Sessions Court, Mumbai, in MPID Misc Application No.987 of 2025 in Misc. Application No.1295 of 2023 of The State (Govandi P. Stn) Vs. Ajitkumar Jain and another
CNR : MHCC020121612025
The complainants – Latha Sidharthan and Kurupath Sidharthan had filed Cri. Misc. Appln No. 1295/2023 and sought direction for investigation u/s. 156(3) of Cr.P.C. to the Govandi Police Station and to initiate criminal proceedings against accused no. 1 – M/s. Mishal Constructions Pvt. Ltd., accused no. 2 – Ajitkumar Jain and accused no. 3 – Navinkumar Jain.
By the order dated 15.10.2024, the Police was directed to conduct preliminary inquiry into the allegations with regard to payment of Rs.1.5 crores to M/s Mishal Constructions Pvt Ltd and to register FIR against the directors / promoters of M/s Mishal Constructions Pvt Ltd and to file compliance report.
In pursuant to order in the above application Govandi police station had conducted inquiry and opined that complainants have already initiated the proceeding against the accused before RERA who in pursuant to order dated 31/10/2024 had directed the accused to hand over possession of flat mentioned therein to the complainants. In view of above fact unless and until any authorized person on behalf of RERA files complaint, cognizance cannot be taken and accordingly report was filed vide Ex-4 which is in the nature of ‘C’ summary. 4. Thereafter, prosecution/ applicant has filed present miscellaneous application and prayed that compliance report be taken on record and accept it.
It would be worthwhile to mention that complainants have filed Cri. MA No. 1295/2023 in which it was contended by them that they had booked a flat no. 1703 on 17/10/2010 in Maitri Vijay Co operative Housing Society and at that time accused had assured and agreed to sell the flat and also hand over possession of the flat by 2016. Accordingly, time and against the complainants have made payment of entire amount of consideration to the tune of Rs. 1,66,57,017/-. But inspite of elapse of 13 years the accused failed to hand over possession and also failed refund the amount. It is further contended that construction work was stopped in the year 2016 and inspite of persistent follow up the accused have not fulfilled their promise. Therefore, the accused have made false representation to the complainants and have duped them as well as many other investors and have committed cheating and criminal breach of trust. They had also approached concerned police station who failed to initiate any action. Hence, complainants have filed the present application for investigation u/s. 156(3) of Cr.P.C. and to initiate proceedings against the accused.
t would be further worthwhile to mention that section 80 of RERA act contemplates that ‘Regular criminal courts cannot take direct notice or act upon any violation or offense under RERA unless the complaint comes directly from the Real Estate Regulatory Authority or its authorized representative.’ But the above provision of RERA Act is confined to an offence under RERA Act and not under any other Act. The provisions of RERA Act and MPID Act will operate in a different domain. If allegations constitutes a cognizable offence then it is incumbent on the part of the concerned police station to file FIR and investigate. Merely because complainants have filed proceedings before RERA will not preclude and bar the Court from directing the concerned police station to register FIR and investigate because provisions of section 14 of MPID Act which contemplates Save as otherwise provided in this Act, the provisions of this Act shall have effect notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any other law for the time being in force or any custom or usage or any instrument having effect by virtue of any such law.” will have overriding effect over other Act and it will obviously include RERA Act. Therefore, the bar contemplated u/s. 80 will not preclude the Court from directing registration of FIR and carrying out investigation.
On perusal of the complaint and order passed by my Ld. Predecessor it is clear that it was incumbent on the part of Govandi police station to register FIR and carry out investigation. But Govandi police station has avoided to register FIR solely on the ground that proceeding under RERA is filed and there is bar of section 80 which is totally erroneous and misconceived proposition of law. Hence, it is necessary to direct the Govandi police station to register FIR against the accused being directors / promoters of M/s. Mishal Construction Pvt. Ltd. u/s. 420, 406 of IPC r/w section 3 of MPID Act.