Court Upholds Charges Against Director in ₹90-Crore Investment Fraud Case
Court rejects‘nominal role’ claim in ₹90-cr deposit fraud
Hindustan Times
Image: Hindustan Times
A designated court in Mumbai has denied the discharge plea of Markas Yohan Thorat, a director of Temple Rose Real Estate Pvt Ltd, in a ₹90-crore investment fraud case involving around 3,000 depositors. The court found sufficient evidence to proceed to trial, rejecting Thorat's claim of being a nominal director with limited involvement.
- 01Court found sufficient evidence to proceed to trial against Markas Yohan Thorat.
- 02Thorat claimed to have a nominal role but was found to have received significant payments.
- 03Evidence suggests he was involved in the company's financial operations and property acquisitions.
- 04The case involves approximately ₹90 crore mobilized from around 3,000 depositors.
- 05The court dismissed Thorat's discharge plea, allowing charges to be framed.
Advertisement
In-Article Ad
In a significant ruling, a designated court in Mumbai has rejected the discharge plea of Markas Yohan Thorat, a director of Temple Rose Real Estate Pvt Ltd, in an alleged investment fraud case involving ₹90 crore and around 3,000 depositors. The court, presided over by Additional Sessions Judge N.G. Shukla, stated that the evidence presented was sufficient to proceed to trial. Thorat had argued that he was merely a nominal director with limited involvement in financial transactions; however, the court noted that he served as a director from 2009 to 2016, the period during which the alleged fraud occurred. The court highlighted that Thorat received approximately ₹2.16 crore in salary, commission, and dividends, which contradicted his claims of limited involvement. Furthermore, evidence indicated that properties were purchased in the names of his family members using investor funds, reinforcing the prosecution's allegations of misappropriation. The Economic Offences Wing opposed Thorat's discharge, asserting that the evidence creates a
Advertisement
In-Article Ad
The ruling allows for accountability in investment fraud cases, potentially protecting future investors from similar schemes.
Advertisement
In-Article Ad
Reader Poll
Do you think stricter regulations are needed to protect investors from fraud?
Connecting to poll...
Read the original article
Visit the source for the complete story.



