In a major crackdown on D-gang, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) has arrested two people – Haroon Yusuf and Ranjeet Singh Bindra – from Mumbai. The arrested people facilitated a land deal worth Rs 200 crore for gangster Iqbal Mirchi. While Yusuf allegedly transferred the money into a trust and facilitated the deal, Bindra brokered the land deal.
ED had taken over old cases of underworld gangsters registered across Mumbai in the 1990s and early 2000s. During the probe, it was found that Mirchi through his associates, from the proceeds of crime, had purchased three properties belonging to Sir Mohammed Yusuf Trust in September 1986 for an amount of 6.5 lakh. These were Sea View, Mariyan Lodge and Rabiya Mansion located in Worli.
The real owner of the properties was Iqbal Mirchi and the lodge was just a cover. He said three properties were given to Rockside Enterprises. They were essentially tenants of the property. Searches and probe were launched to find out the real owners of the properties. It was found that the possession of these properties was transferred to Iqbal Mirchi by the trust in 1993. After he fled the country, the properties remained in the name of the trust only on paper. It has been found that the then tenants were replaced by the relatives and associates of Mirchi. In 2005, confiscation of the properties done under SAFEMA was quashed by the court.
Humayun Merchant, a close associate of Mirchi, arranged a meeting between Jayant B Soni, director of Joy Home Creation and Iqbal Mirchi in London. And the plan was put in place to redevelop the properties. Later in 2010, Sun Blink Real Estate entered into an agreement for tenancy rights for Rs 250 crore. Ranjeet Singh Bindra represented Sun Blink and was given brokerage of Rs 50 for finalising the deal. Sources in the ED said that the crackdown on assets (movable and immovable) acquired by organised crime syndicates from proceeds of crime in Mumbai will continue. Here is the full application by ED submitted to the City Civil and Sessions Court, Mumbai requesting the remand of the two under section 167 of CrPC: