The alleged ₹500 Crore Investment Fraud case witnessed a significant development as the Thane Sessions Court heard the bail application of accused Preeti Sachin Rane on June 19, 2026. Investigators informed the court that financial records, bank accounts, properties, and investor fund trails continue to be scrutinized as part of the ongoing Economic Offences Wing investigation. The matter affects more than 1,246 investors and remains under active judicial and investigative review. In a related development, the court recently rejected the anticipatory bail application of co-accused Manali Nirav Soni, citing the need for custodial interrogation and further financial investigation.

Thane ₹500 Crore Investment Fraud Case: Preeti Sachin Rane’s Bail Plea Heard; Investigation Report Signals Expanded Financial Probe

The Thane Sessions Court heard the bail application of accused Preeti Sachin Rane on June 19, 2026, in the alleged ₹500 crore investment fraud case. Investigators informed the court that financial transactions, bank accounts, properties, and investor fund movements remain under detailed scrutiny.

The bail application of accused Preeti Sachin Rane was heard before the Thane Sessions Court on June 19, 2026, in connection with the alleged investment fraud case involving claims exceeding ₹500 crore and affecting more than 1,246 investors.

During the proceedings, Advocate Rajesh Dattu Kakad appeared on behalf of investors. The matter continues to be investigated by the Economic Offences Wing (EOW), Thane.

According to information presented before the court through the latest investigation report, authorities are conducting an extensive examination of financial transactions, multiple bank accounts, properties, and the alleged movement of investor funds linked to the case.

The report indicated that investigators are pursuing several financial leads while examining transaction records and tracing the flow of money through various channels. Authorities informed the court that multiple aspects of the alleged fraud remain under active investigation.

Investigation Report Highlights Expanding Financial Examination

The developments assume significance because the case has attracted attention across Maharashtra due to the scale of alleged investor losses and the number of individuals who claim to have been affected.

For several months, Advocate Rajesh Dattu Kakad has pursued legal representations, complaints, submissions, and court interventions concerning what he and several investors described as delays and shortcomings in investigative progress.

According to investors associated with the matter, sustained legal follow-up and continued representations before various authorities have contributed to renewed momentum in the investigation and increased scrutiny of financial transactions connected to the case.

Several investors stated that the progress reflected in the latest report was encouraging and a result of the intellect and rigorous hard work of their advocate. They described the hearing as an important development in their continuing efforts to seek accountability and recovery of funds.

However, investors also emphasized that the legal process remains ongoing. They reiterated that their primary objective continues to be the recovery of invested money and the identification of all persons ultimately found responsible under law.

With investigators reportedly examining additional financial records and transaction trails, investors are closely monitoring future proceedings and developments before the courts and investigating agencies.

Also Read: The Aqua Lounge in Ambernath Faces Regulatory Scrutiny.

Related News: Yes Bank Moves Court in ₹500 Crore Investment Scam Case.

Related News: Court Rejects Bail in Thane Ponzi Scam worth ₹500 Crore.

Manali Nirav Soni’s Anticipatory Bail Rejected by Thane Court

In a related development, the Additional Sessions Court, Thane, on June 17, 2026, rejected the anticipatory bail application filed by Manali Nirav Soni, co-accused in the ongoing MPID-related investment fraud investigation.

According to court records, the prosecution informed the court that investigators had traced investor funds through multiple accounts, including accounts allegedly linked to the applicant. The prosecution argued that custodial interrogation remained necessary.

The Investigating Officer reportedly informed the court that approximately 205 investors had been identified at that stage of the investigation and that the alleged amount under examination was estimated at ₹15.91 crore.

While rejecting the anticipatory bail application, Additional Sessions Judge D.B. Mane observed that investigation into the transfer and movement of funds was continuing and that custodial interrogation was required for an effective probe.

The court further noted that the applicant’s account was allegedly used for receiving and transferring funds connected to the investment scheme. On that basis, the request for pre-arrest protection was declined.

Investors Await Next Legal and Investigative Developments

The rejection of Manali Nirav Soni’s anticipatory bail application, coupled with the investigation status report presented during the hearing of alleged fraudster Preeti Sachin Rane’s bail plea, has strengthened confidence among several investors.

According to investors, these developments indicate that authorities are intensifying efforts to trace funds, identify beneficiaries, establish financial linkages, and determine responsibilities within the broader alleged fraud network.

The larger case, involving allegations concerning more than ₹180 crore and approximately 1,246 investors, remains under investigation. Future hearings and investigative findings are expected to play a crucial role in determining the next course of legal action.

Readers’ Appeal

Individuals possessing documents, transaction records, or information relevant to this case may contact Unmesh Gujarathi, Investigative Journalist, and the Sprouts News Special Investigation Team (SIT) to share verifiable information in the larger public interest. Readers may connect with the team on 9322755098.

Editorial Note:

This article is based on publicly available FIR records, court case references, and reports published by multiple media organisations. The information is presented in the context of ongoing investigations and public interest reporting. Sprouts News does not make any judicial determination regarding the individuals mentioned and does not intend to defame any person or organisation. Any individual seeking clarification or wishing to provide an official response may contact the editorial team with verifiable documentation. The information is presented for journalistic and informational purposes.