Dapoli resort case: Sadanand Kadam remanded in ED custody till March 15
A local court on Saturday remanded Sadanand Kadam, alleged partner of Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray) MLC Anil Parab, in Enforcement Directorate (ED) custody till March 15. Kadam was arrested on Friday evening in connection with his involvement in the construction of an illegal resort in Dapoli in Ratnagiri district
MUMBAI: A local court on Saturday remanded Sadanand Kadam, alleged partner of Shiv Sena (Uddhav Balasaheb Thackeray) MLC Anil Parab, in Enforcement Directorate (ED) custody till March 15.
Kadam was arrested on Friday evening in connection with his involvement in the construction of an illegal resort in Dapoli in Ratnagiri district.
On Saturday, the ED produced Kadam before a holiday court and sought his custody for 14 days, claiming that “Parab had in connivance with Kadam built Sai Resort NX by investing unaccounted money that too in violation of coastal regulation zone (CRZ)-III rules.”
In its plea seeking Kadam’s custody remand, the agency claimed that the value of the land is around ₹2.74 crore, and on the said land the resort valued at ₹7.46 crore was “generated” out of the criminal activities. Thus, the ED claimed that the total proceeds of crime in the case exceed ₹10.20 crore.
“Kadam in connivance with Parab by constructing Sai Resort NX, caused detrimental damage to the environment. This is because of the absence of any sewage and other municipal or such outlets for the safe discharge of effluents, owing to the illegal construction of the said resort, causing great damage to the environment and ecology of the seashore,” the agency said in the plea.
The ED claimed that “Parab purchased the land admeasuring 42.14 guntas from Vibhas Sathe for consideration of ₹1.80 crore, out of which an amount of ₹80 lakh was paid in cash and the cash was handed over to Sathe by Kadam on behalf of Parab.”
After the sale of the land parcel, a meeting with the architect was held to prepare the design for twin bungalows even when the architect said it cannot be done on the said land, the ED plea said. Also, they continued to mention Sathe’s name on the designs even after the land deal.
The agency claimed that a formal sale deed for the land was executed only on June 19, 2019, even when it was sold in 2017 and soon after taking possession of the land, the construction of the twin bungalows began which were later converted into the resort.
Besides, it was alleged that soon after the deal, they had made Sathe make an application to convert the land usage from agricultural to non-agricultural. “Kadam had pressurised the revenue department officials and obtained illegal permission on September 12, 2017,” the ED said in the plea.
It added that on June 26, 2019, Parab approached the village panchayat stating that he had purchased the land along with the structure from Sathe as per the agreement signed a week before and requested the panchayat to assess and levy tax on the said structure and register it in his name.
According to the agency, Kadam had pressurised the sarpanch and gram sevak to do the assessment and taxation proceedings immediately. Thus, soon Parab paid tax of ₹46,806 and tried to get the construction legitimised and antedate the construction of the resort.
“When various complaints regarding the illegal construction of the resort came to light, Parab sold the land to Kadam on paper to conceal the illegalities. The sale deed was made in December 2020 for a consideration of ₹1.20 crore and the payment of ₹1 crore was made in June 2021,” the plea stated.
The agency claimed that when the fraud came to light, Kadam was belatedly showed making expenses in his book for the construction and showed expenses of ₹3.59 crores in the year 2020-21.
Opposing the remand plea, Kadam’s lawyer, advocate Niranjan Mundargi, contended that the resort was shut and therefore there was no question of discharging effluents beyond limit etc. The lawyer also questioned the legality of the money laundering case based on the offence registered under provisions of the Environment Protection Act.