PUNE, Jan. 7 -- A Pune court has rejected the bail application of Sheetal Kishanchand Tejwani Suryavanshi, the alleged power-of-attorney holder accused of illegally selling government land in Mundhwa and Bopodi to a company reportedly linked to Parth Pawar's partnership firm, Amedia. The court held that a prima facie case of cheating the government has been made out and that releasing her at this stage could jeopardise the ongoing investigation. The court observed that the alleged sale involved government land disposed of without mandatory sanction and without payment of requisite stamp duty. It also noted the economic nature of the offence and the high value of the transactions under scrutiny. Tejwani, along with suspended tehsildar Suryakant Yewale, Amadea LLP director Digvijay Amarsingh Patil and others, has been booked in an FIR registered at Khadki police station. The case pertains to alleged illegal sale transactions involving government land and execution of sale deeds without statutory permissions and compliance. After being remanded to judicial custody, Tejwani moved the court for bail, contending that the dispute was civil in nature. Her counsel argued that she had no connection with the Bopodi land transaction and that the Mundhwa sale was lawful, claiming the land belonged to Watandars and not the state. It was also argued that liability to pay stamp duty rests with the purchaser, not the seller. Citing personal circumstances, the defence sought relief under the proviso to Section 480 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), submitting that Tejwani is a single mother of minor school-going children and suffers from hypertension, vertigo and other ailments. The prosecution opposed the plea, with district government pleader Pramod Bombatkar and additional public prosecutor Amit Yadav, appearing for the district collector's office, arguing that revenue records clearly show the Mundhwa land as government property. They submitted that Tejwani sold the land to Amedia without government sanction and without paying stamp duty, and that she was the prime accused and beneficiary of the alleged transaction. The prosecution further contended that releasing her on bail could lead to tampering with evidence, influencing witnesses, and the possibility of absconding. It was also pointed out that several Watandars, on whose behalf the sale deeds were executed, were deceased at the time of the transaction. Accepting these submissions, the court underlined the seriousness of the allegations and the stage of investigation. It declined to extend discretionary bail on the ground of gender or medical condition alone. "Prima facie, it appears that the applicant has sold government property at Mundhwa without sanction and without paying requisite stamp duty, thereby cheating the government. The alleged transaction involves a huge amount and the investigation is still in progress," the court said, adding that the issue of whether the land belonged to Watandars or the government cannot be decided at this stage. The court further noted that there was a real possibility of the accused tampering with evidence, influencing witnesses or fleeing justice if released on bail. "Merely because the applicant is a woman cannot be a ground for granting bail, considering the nature and gravity of the offence," the judge observed. The complainant and counsel representing the Watandars relied on the Supreme Court judgment in Nimmagadda Prasad v. Central Bureau of Investigation, arguing that economic offences require a stricter approach while considering bail. Taking note of the rival submissions and the ongoing investigation, the court concluded that it was not a fit case to grant bail at this stage....