‘Money used for personal gains, expenditure’: Punjab and Haryana HC denies bail to Mahira Group promoter Dharam Singh Chhoker
The Punjab and Haryana High Court also noted several complaints and FIRs filed by distressed homebuyers, observing that the Mahira Group case was not an isolated instance.
Justice Tribhuvan Dahiya found merit in the Enforcement Directorate (ED)’s contention that Dharam Singh Chhoker posed a flight risk. (File Photo) The Punjab and Haryana High Court Wednesday refused bail to Mahira Group promoter and former Congress MLA from Samalkha in Haryana, Dharam Singh Chhoker, in a money laundering case, underscoring allegations that hundreds of crores of rupees collected from homebuyers were siphoned off while promised flats remained incomplete.
Dismissing the plea, Justice Tribhuvan Dahiya found merit in the Enforcement Directorate (ED)’s contention that Dharam Singh Chhoker posed a flight risk. He was arrested last year.
The case stems from an affordable housing project in Sector 68, Gurgaon, where around 1,500 buyers collectively paid about Rs 363 crore for flats to be delivered by 2021-22. Investigators allege that instead of being utilised for construction, funds were diverted through a web of companies linked to the Mahira Group.
The Central agency also pointed to “bogus purchases… to the tune of Rs 56 crore (approx.)”, where payments were allegedly cycled through entities and cash was withdrawn for the accused family’s private use.
The court noted multiple complaints and FIRs filed by aggrieved homebuyers, observing that the case was not an isolated instance but part of a broader pattern of alleged cheating, forgery, and fund diversion across projects.
Equally significant to the court was the conduct of Dharam Singh Chhoker during the investigation. It recorded that Chhoker had failed to comply with at least 17 summons and could not be arrested despite repeated non-bailable warrants. He was eventually apprehended in May 2025 from a hotel in New Delhi after “his outrageous attempt to flee from the scene was foiled… with the help of Delhi Police and security staff.”
“Keeping these facts in view, no exception can be taken to the assertion by the ED that he is a flight risk,” the court said.
Rejecting the argument of prolonged incarceration, the court held that the custody since May 2025 could not be termed excessive in the context of the case, particularly given that the trial was set to commence and the delays could not be attributed to the prosecution.
It also noted that the stringent twin conditions under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act had not been satisfied, and that Dharam Singh Chhoker had made no effort to demonstrate compliance with them.
While the defence argued that the evidence was largely documentary and that the co-accused had been granted bail, the court declined parity, noting that the earlier bail order was under challenge before the Supreme Court.
Concluding that the gravity of the allegations, the scale of the alleged fraud against homebuyers, and the accused’s conduct weighed against him, the court dismissed the petition, paving the way for trial to proceed.
Share
