The M3M India land fraud case will proceed on charges of cheating and criminal conspiracy after a Delhi court upheld proceedings against M3M India Pvt Ltd, its promoters and others over an alleged ₹450-crore land transaction.
Principal District and Sessions Judge Anju Bajaj Chandna passed the order while hearing revision petitions challenging a trial court’s decision to take cognisance of the alleged offences.
The court upheld proceedings under Sections 420, 120-B and 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), relating to cheating, criminal conspiracy and acts done with common intention. However, it set aside the cognisance of criminal breach of trust under Section 406, ruling that the necessary elements of the offence had not been established at this stage.
The accused have been directed to appear before the chief judicial magistrate on October 27. The court also directed the trial court to proceed expeditiously.
M3M India land fraud case concerns 31 acres in Gurugram
The case stems from allegations by MGF Developments Ltd concerning approximately 31 acres of land in Chauma village, Gurugram.
According to the prosecution, the transaction was finalised in November 2016. It involved exchanging the Chauma land for a parcel in Mohammadpur Gujar village in Sohna, Gurugram, along with an additional payment of Rs 114 crore.
Around ₹16.30 crore was paid upfront, while post-dated cheques worth ₹98 crore were issued for the outstanding amount.
The chargesheet alleges that the cheques were replaced twice but were returned unpaid on March 28, 2018, following stop-payment instructions.
The prosecution further alleged that the accused companies subsequently secured mutation of portions of the land in their names and applied for licences to develop residential projects despite the outstanding payment.
These allegations have not been established as proven offences through a final trial judgment.
Court sets aside criminal breach of trust charge
In its October 17 order, the court held that the trial court’s decision to take cognisance under Section 406 IPC was not sustainable in law because the ingredients of criminal breach of trust were not made out.
However, it declined to interfere with the cheating proceedings under Sections 420, 120 and 34 IPC at this stage.
The court observed that the accused could raise their arguments before the magistrate during the hearing on framing of charges. It also said the evidence could not be examined in detail at the stage of taking cognisance.
The order therefore allows the cheating and conspiracy proceedings to continue while removing the criminal breach of trust charge from the cognisance order.
M3M and promoters challenged trial court proceedings
M3M India, its promoters Basant Bansal, Roop Kumar Bansal and Pankaj Bansal, and other accused challenged the trial court’s January 31, 2026 order.
They argued that MGF lacked the legal standing to file the complaint and that the dispute was civil and contractual rather than criminal.
The accused also contended that separate land-owning companies had executed the exchange deeds and that the outstanding amount had subsequently been deposited in court.
Opposing the revision petitions, MGF’s counsel alleged that the accused had made false assurances about payment and secured the land transfer despite lacking sufficient funds to honour the cheques.
The court held that questions concerning the complainant’s standing and the civil nature of the dispute required consideration by the magistrate at the appropriate stage.
Delhi Police EOW registered FIR in 2022
The case originates from an FIR registered by the Delhi Police’s Economic Offences Wing in 2022 following MGF’s complaint.
Several civil proceedings relating to the land and the transaction are also pending between the parties.
The next stage of the criminal proceedings will allow the magistrate to consider the parties’ submissions on the framing of charges. The court’s order does not determine the accused persons’ guilt or resolve the pending civil disputes.
