top of page

By:

Abhijit Mulye

21 August 2024 at 11:29:11 am

Multi-Crore ‘Land Jihad’ unearthed

Lawyer reclaims grabbed properties, exposes administrative lapses Advocate Sanjeev Deshpande Mumbai: In Bhusaval, a glaring example of what is being termed ‘Land Jihad’ has recently been brought to light, exposing a systematic grab of prime real estate worth hundreds of crores. At the center of this revelation is a hard-fought legal victory that successfully vacated ill-intentioned occupants from a plush property, prompting urgent calls for the administration to remain vigilant against...

Multi-Crore ‘Land Jihad’ unearthed

Lawyer reclaims grabbed properties, exposes administrative lapses Advocate Sanjeev Deshpande Mumbai: In Bhusaval, a glaring example of what is being termed ‘Land Jihad’ has recently been brought to light, exposing a systematic grab of prime real estate worth hundreds of crores. At the center of this revelation is a hard-fought legal victory that successfully vacated ill-intentioned occupants from a plush property, prompting urgent calls for the administration to remain vigilant against fraudulent land acquisitions. The catalyst for uncovering this massive scam was a protracted legal battle fought by the Central Cine Circuit Association (CCCA), an organisation comprising over 800 film distributors across Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, and Rajasthan. Seeking a headquarters and guest house for their traveling members, the CCCA purchased a sprawling 5,000-square-foot bungalow in a prime locality in Bhusaval from a senior Parsi individual residing in Mumbai. Although the sale deed was executed in 1993, the notice of ownership change inexplicably failed to reach or was ignored by the local city survey office. This administrative blind spot lay dormant until 2024, when the family of one Afzal Kalu Gawali forcibly entered the premises and took illegal possession of the property. Physical Muscle Lacking the physical muscle to evict the encroachers, the CCCA was forced into an agonising two-year legal marathon spearheaded by Advocate Sanjeev Deshpande. The fight demanded navigating a labyrinth of government offices, from the Sub-Divisional Magistrate (SDM) and Bhusaval Sessions Court to the revenue tribunal, the High Court, and even Mantralaya. The process involved digging through decades-old records, exposing forged documents, and pleading with officials to rectify the injustice. The persistence finally paid off when the SDM ruled in favor of the CCCA on April 9, 2026. When the illegal occupants still refused to leave, police intervention was secured to forcibly vacate the premises, allowing CCCA employees to finally re-enter their headquarters on April 16 after a gap of nearly two years, said Sanjay Surana, president of CCCA. Fight Continues For Deshpande, the fight is far from over. During his exhaustive hunt for documents, he uncovered a deeply disturbing and systematic pattern of land grabbing operating in the region. The conmen utilised a calculated modus operandi. They tactfully acquired a power of attorney from the descendants of the original Parsi owners and forged purchase documents. Shockingly, the paperwork claimed that the CCCA bungalow, currently valued at around Rs 5 crore, was purchased by daily wage earners for a mere Rs 6 lakh. Deshpande discovered that this same syndicate had successfully encroached upon other highly valuable plots, including a six-acre cemetery (Aramgah) belonging to the Parsi Anjuman Fund and a significant parcel of land owned by the Masonic Lodge, an international religious institute. In total, the collective value of these illegally grabbed properties is estimated to easily surpass Rs 300 crore. The Masonic Lodge property is back to rightful owners after a battle at the High Court. But, for the Aramgah property, still much needs to be done, he said. This staggering real estate heist points to a severe breakdown in administrative oversight. Deshpande strongly emphasises that if the office of the Sub-Registrar at Bhusaval had conducted even a preliminary inquiry or verified the glaringly disproportionate financial details of these transactions, the fraudulent nature of the sales would have been immediately apparent.

Sacred Attire

Updated: Jan 30, 2025

The Siddhivinayak Temple Trust’s recent decision to implement a dress code prohibiting short skirts, torn jeans and other revealing attire is a necessary move to uphold the sanctity of religious spaces. Temples are spiritual spaces where devotees seek solace, offer prayers, and connect with the divine. Temples are not mere tourist attractions but sacred sanctuaries. The least that visitors can do is dress accordingly.


The Jagannath temple in Puri, Odisha, and the Banke Bihari temple in Vrindavan have already implemented similar rules, reflecting a growing recognition that religious spaces require a modicum of decorum. In the case of Siddhivinayak, the temple attracts thousands of devotees daily, many of whom have expressed discomfort over attire that they feel clashes with the temple’s spiritual ambience.


Few would question the need for decorum in a courtroom, a government office, or even an upscale restaurant. Yet, when religious institutions enforce dress codes to preserve their sanctity, a chorus of indignation often rises in the name of personal freedom, with such ‘critics’ arguing that such rules reflect moral policing or an imposition of traditionalist values.

But this argument confuses religious sanctity with public space liberalism. No one is being compelled to enter the temple, and those who do should respect the customs that govern it. Even in non-Hindu religious spaces, dress codes are the norm. One does not enter a gurdwara without covering their head, nor a mosque or church dressed in attire deemed unsuitable for prayer. The sanctity of a religious institution should not be sacrificed at the altar of modern whims.


To dismiss this as an encroachment on personal liberties is to misunderstand the nature of such spaces. Religious sites operate under different expectations than public thoroughfares or commercial hubs. They are designed for reflection, devotion, and ritual. While Indian society has rightly evolved towards greater personal freedom in many spheres, faith-based institutions must be allowed to maintain traditions that are integral to their identity. The temple trust has made it clear that its goal is not to impose regressive restrictions but to ensure that all visitors feel comfortable and that the sanctity of the temple is upheld.


Moreover, the argument that religious sites must remain entirely open-ended in their dress codes simply does not hold water. Many of the people who object to these restrictions would scarcely question the need for appropriate attire at a formal event or while meeting a dignitary. The principle is the same -respect for the setting dictates the mode of dress. Those who seek to frame this as a battle between liberalism and conservatism fail to grasp that such measures are about propriety, not repression.


In an era where the lines between cultural expression and decorum are increasingly blurred, it is worth remembering that not every rule is an infringement on liberty. If people can abide by dress codes in secular spaces, they should extend the same courtesy to places of worship.

Comments


bottom of page