Did Tanaji Sawant misguide authorities in son’s mid-air return?

Rushiraj, 32, along with two friends, had taken a flight to Bangkok from Pune on Monday without informing his family

Questions have emerged over whether Shiv Sena leader MLA and former minister Tanaji Sawant misled authorities, including the police, chief minister Devendra Fadnavis, and the union minister of State for Civil Aviation Murlidhar Mohol, in a dramatic sequence of events that saw his son Rushiraj Sawant’s chartered flight return to Pune mid-air. 

When Rushiraj became unreachable, Tanaji Sawant reportedly contacted chief minister Fadnavis, deputy chief minister Eknath Shinde, and union minister Murlidhar Mohol. (HT)

Rushiraj, 32, along with two friends, had taken a flight to Bangkok from Pune on Monday without informing his family. On his return, Rushiraj told the police he was visiting Bangkok for a business trip. 

Sources from the firm offering Chartered flight confirmed that instructions had been given to hold Rushiraj and his friends upon landing in Bangkok.  

“We, along with the police, had planned multiple ways to bring them back safely. If they had landed in Bangkok, Plan B was to ensure they remained inside the aircraft until local authorities intervened,” said an aviation firm executive. 

It is learnt that Indian police and central agencies had contacted Thai authorities, informing them of the situation and seeking their cooperation in preventing Rushiraj from clearing immigration. 

When Rushiraj became unreachable, Sawant reportedly contacted chief minister Fadnavis, deputy chief minister Eknath Shinde, and union minister Murlidhar Mohol. Simultaneously, police were prompted to file a kidnapping case at Sinhgad Road police station. 

However, a senior police officer requesting anonymity said that Sawant may have known his son had not been kidnapped. Despite this, he took swift action, personally reaching the Commissioner of Police’s office and calling the highest authorities to ensure the return of the flight. This has raised concerns over whether an urgent police response and government intervention were warranted in what appears to have been a family dispute. 

A day after the incident, Rushiraj’s elder brother, Giriraj Sawant, admitted that the family was aware of his travel plans. “On Monday at around 3:30 pm, I received a message from Rushiraj that he was going on a trip for two days. This is not common in our family, as we always communicate our plans. But this time, he switched off his phone, which worried us,” he said. 

Sources indicated that the family had opposed Rushiraj’s Bangkok trip since he had recently returned from Dubai. His decision to switch off his phone and proceed with his travel plans may have escalated tensions within the family. 

Using his political influence, Tanaji Sawant reportedly ensured that multiple government agencies, including police and aviation authorities, took swift action. The return of the chartered flight mid-air raises questions about whether such intervention was necessary. 

Giriraj Sawant, however, defended his father’s actions, stating, “No, this is not a misuse of power. Look at it from the perspective of a parent. Their son left without informing anyone, which is unusual. That’s why we approached the police.” He went on to thank Fadnavis, Shinde, Ajit Pawar, and Mohol for their intervention in bringing Rushiraj back. 

Further complicating matters, officials confirmed that had the flight landed in Bangkok, local authorities had been instructed to detain Rushiraj and his friends upon arrival. An officer from an aviation company revealed, “We, along with the police, had multiple plans in place. If the flight had landed, Plan B was ready. We were instructed to keep them on the plane until local authorities arrived.” 

Officials stated that central agencies had coordinated with Thai authorities to prevent Rushiraj and his friends from entering Bangkok. Once detained, they would have been sent back to India without completing immigration formalities. 

As speculation grows over Sawant’s role in the episode, he has denied any misuse of power. “There were no family disputes. My son is in his 30s. We have never had conflicts. Last night, we had a good conversation, and this morning, he performed a Rudra Abhishek before heading to college as per his routine. That’s why I initially said there was no kidnapping. But I was worried because he left suddenly without informing anyone,” he said. 

Joint commissioner of Police Ranjan Kumar Sharma defended the police action, stating, “We received information that he was kidnapped, and accordingly, a case was registered.” 

Despite these clarifications, questions hovered over why a kidnapping case was filed if Rushiraj’s whereabouts were known. 

Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Sushma Andhare questioned how the police and entire machinery acted swiftly.  

“In the Badlapur rape case when we are trying to get justice, we had to agitate for hours to get the case registered at the police station. But in this case, we have seen how politicians are using pressure on police and police also using red carpets for them,” said Andhare. 

Vijay Kumbhar, Pune-based RTI activist and AAP leader said, “The father used his power to bring down the plane of the adult and married son! But what is the justice in this misuse of government machinery? Is the law only for the common man? Who exactly created the kidnapping drama?” 

Tanaji Sawant, a businessman and educationalist, joined the Shiv Sena in 2015 and has since consolidated his position in the party. However, the recent controversies surrounding him including that of allegations of corruption of ₹6.2 crore ambulance service scam. Sawant, then public health minister, had denied the allegations. 

Known to have substantial assets worth ₹235 crore, he controls multiple educational institutes in Pune and Pimpri-Chinchwad, along with a sugar factory in Osmanabad. He has also been active in real estate development. 

In a political rally in Dharashiv district, Sawant claimed to have played a key role in the toppling of the MVA government. He said he conducted over 100 meetings with Fadnavis and Shinde to help form a government with the BJP. 

With the latest controversy surrounding his son’s return, the unfolding developments raise critical questions about the use of political influence in administrative matters. While Sawant has defended his actions as those of a concerned parent, the circumstances under which multiple government agencies were involved in a personal matter remain under scrutiny.