Supreme Court Pulls Up Satinder Singh Bhasin Over Bail Breach In Grand Venice Matter

In SATINDER SINGH BHASIN Vs GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI, the Supreme Court has cancelled the bail of businessman Satinder Singh Bhasin after finding that he failed to honour bail conditions linked to the Grand Venice project. The Court directed him to surrender within one week.

The matter arose from complaints by flat allottees who accused Bhasin of cheating, misusing their money, and failing to deliver promised units. The allegations relate to the Grand Venice project in the National Capital Region, which included a mall and a commercial tower.

A Bench of Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice NK Singh found that Bhasin did not genuinely settle the claims of the allottees, despite this being a clear condition of his bail granted on November 6, 2019. The Court said the direction was not a symbolic requirement.

It noted that many buyers were still waiting either for possession or for refunds. Even where settlement agreements were signed, those terms were not actually carried out. The Court found that such settlements largely remained on paper and gave no real relief to the affected persons.

The Supreme Court also took serious note of the source of the ₹50 crore deposited as a bail condition. According to the Court, the amount was required to come from Bhasin in his personal capacity, but it actually came from company funds and related entities.

The Bench found this unacceptable, especially because no board resolution had been passed by Bhasin Infotech and Infrastructure Private Limited before the money was used. It said the arrangement did not satisfy the legal requirements under Section 185 of the Companies Act, 2013.

The Court observed: “Upon a consideration of the above submissions and the breakup as filed by the petitioner himself, it cannot be disputed that the amount of Rs. 50 crores has originated from the funds of BIIPL and other related entities.”

It further said: “An alarming aspect is that no board resolution has been passed by BIIPL before disbursal of the amount to secure his bail.”

On the project itself, the Court was not convinced that the construction had reached a stage where possession could be handed over. It found that the property was not ready and that settlement with buyers seeking possession was not possible in its present condition.

The Bench also referred to multiple FIRs filed in Delhi and Uttar Pradesh, insolvency proceedings against the company, and Bhasin’s failure to cooperate properly in those proceedings. Information filed by him before the Court did not inspire confidence, leading to a show-cause notice in November 2025.

As a result, the Court ordered forfeiture of the full ₹50 crore deposit along with accrued interest. Out of this, ₹5 crore with proportionate interest will go to NALSA, while the remaining amount will be transferred to the IRP for use in insolvency proceedings.

The Court also barred Bhasin from seeking fresh regular bail for 12 months, unless he first complies with directions passed in the insolvency process. It further directed that his passport must not be released without the Court’s permission.