‘Impulsive and Hurried’: Bombay HC Terms Anchor Group’s Hemang Shah’s Arrest Illegal; Slams Police for Acting in Haste

In a scathing order, the Bombay High Court has termed the arrest of Hemang Shah, Director of the Anchor Group, as illegal and criticised the Mumbai Police for acting in an "impulsive and hurried manner" in a family financial dispute.

The division bench expressed concern over the "unnecessary enthusiasm" displayed by the police in detaining Shah, observing that the arrest seemed aimed at extracting a disputed financial amount rather than pursuing a legitimate legal process.

The court took particular note of the unusual sequence of events. A complaint against Shah was registered at 2:14 a.m. on May 14 at Malabar Hill Police Station by his elder brother, Mehul Shah, following which a Look Out Circular (LOC) was promptly issued. Terming this sequence “disturbing,” the bench said it reflected a serious disregard for due process.

Hemang Shah was detained at Delhi’s Indira Gandhi International Airport on May 17 while he was preparing to board a flight to Muscat. He was brought to Mumbai thereafter and placed under arrest.

Challenging the arrest, Shah filed a writ petition before the High Court through his legal team led by Senior Advocate Ravi Prakash, along with advocates Munaf Virjee, Aditya Dewan, Debopriyo Moulik, and Sagar Shetty. The matter was argued under the banner of AMR Law and Hrituraj Singh.

In the petition, Shah contended that the issue was a private family dispute under mediation, and not a matter warranting police action. The petition also alleged that shortly after Shah’s detention, his sister-in-law called his wife, instructing her to bring a cheque book to the Economic Offences Wing (EOW) office — an indication, the court said, that financial pressure was being applied under the guise of criminal procedure.

Supporting this claim, screenshots of the conversation were submitted as evidence. On examining the records, the court noted that the arrest appeared to be "a tool to force a financial settlement" rather than an outcome of fair investigation.

Further, Shah alleged that he was picked up in Delhi around 5:30 p.m. on May 17 but was produced before a magistrate only at 10:45 p.m. on May 18 — in violation of the 24-hour rule mandated under the law. His legal counsel argued that the authorities failed to inform any of Shah’s nominated contacts or family members, thereby breaching procedural norms.

Countering these claims, the prosecution told the court that Shah and the EOW team landed in Mumbai at 10:30 a.m. on May 18 and that he was formally arrested at 7:30 p.m. after preliminary questioning. It was also claimed that Shah’s father had been informed about the development.

However, the court rejected this justification, pointing out that Shah’s father himself was one of the complainants. Calling the explanation “shocking,” the judges remarked that such conduct eroded the credibility of the prosecution’s version.

The judgment has once again raised serious questions about the approach adopted by Mumbai Police in handling economic offences and underlined the importance of following legal procedure even in high-profile financial disputes.