ED Attaches Lambat Building in Mumbai Worth ₹4 Crore in Money Laundering Case Involving Aslam Patni and Salim Fruit
The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has provisionally attached assets worth approximately ₹4 crore, including Lambat Building in Mumbai’s Dongri area and bank balances belonging to Aslam Abdul Rehman Patni and other accused persons, in connection with an alleged property fraud and extortion case involving individuals linked to underworld figure Salim Iqbal Qureshi, popularly known as Salim Fruit. The attachment was announced by the ED on November 5, 2026.
According to the ED, its investigation has revealed that Lambat Building was allegedly acquired through a combination of impersonation, forged documents, threats and coercion. The agency has alleged that Shabbir Ahmed Hassan Karolia and Yusuf Ahmed Hassen Karolia conspired to illegally acquire the property by impersonating its original owner and fabricating documents, including a deed of conveyance.
The investigation has also brought Aslam Abdul Rehman Patni under scrutiny. The ED has alleged that Patni acquired a 50 per cent share in Lambat Building belonging to Yasmin Mohammed Ahmed and late Sherzada Jangrez Khan in 2019 through threats and coercion. The agency stated that the original owners were allegedly deprived of their ownership interest without receiving any consideration.
According to the ED, threats were allegedly made in the names of Dawood Ibrahim, D-Company and Salim Fruit, who is described by the agency as the brother-in-law of Chhota Shakeel. The property was subsequently transferred by Patni to Shazia Salim Iqbal Qureshi, the wife of Salim Fruit. The ED has alleged that successive transactions were structured to give an appearance of legitimate ownership to the property despite its alleged criminal origin.
The provisional attachment covers Lambat Building and bank balances belonging to Patni and other accused persons. The total value of the attached assets has been estimated at approximately ₹4 crore.
The action is part of the ED’s investigation under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), which concerns the alleged acquisition and subsequent transfer of the property. The agency is examining the transactions through which the building changed hands and the alleged use of forged documents and coercion in the process.
The Lambat Building case has a history that goes back several years. Before the ED’s latest action, the Mumbai Police had investigated allegations of property usurpation and forged documents involving the building. The earlier investigation had also resulted in arrests, including that of Salim Fruit and Aslam Patni.
According to reports published in November 2022, the original complaint was made by a South Africa-based businessman concerning a property in Umarkhadi, south Mumbai, which had belonged to his deceased father. The complainant alleged that the property had been transferred using forged documents even though his father had died several years before the purported transaction.
The complainant’s father had died in South Africa in 2006. The property was reportedly being managed through a private company, with two individuals collecting rent from tenants and handing it over to the complainant’s sister. The alleged irregularities came to light in 2016 when the sister visited Mumbai and discovered that the building had supposedly been sold by their father in 2011.
The family questioned how the property could have been sold through documents purportedly executed by someone who had already died. Following inquiries with the land registrar’s office, the complainant alleged that the documents used for the transfer had been forged. The Mumbai Police subsequently registered an FIR in September 2022.
The earlier police investigation alleged that the deceased owner’s signature had been forged to facilitate the transfer of the property. The case involved allegations of impersonation and the preparation and use of fraudulent property documents. The investigation examined the roles of individuals allegedly involved in the transfer and the subsequent ownership arrangements.
The property transactions reported in 2019 added another layer to the dispute. According to earlier media reports, two individuals who owned a company allegedly sold the property to three persons in 2019, with Salim Fruit’s wife receiving a 50 per cent share. The remaining 50 per cent was subsequently sold to Patni by the two individuals holding that interest. Patni then transferred his share to Salim Fruit’s wife, who eventually became the owner of the entire building.
The ED’s latest press release has provided further details about the alleged acquisition of the 50 per cent share by Patni. The agency has specifically alleged that the share belonging to Yasmin Mohammed Ahmed and late Sherzada Jangrez Khan was obtained through threats and coercion in 2019. It has also stated that the original owners did not receive any consideration for the transfer.
The alleged involvement of Shabbir Ahmed Hassan Karolia and Yusuf Ahmed Hassen Karolia relates to the earlier acquisition of the property through impersonation and forged documents. According to the ED, the two allegedly conspired to acquire Lambat Building illegally by impersonating its original owner and fabricating documents, including a deed of conveyance.
The two individuals had also figured in the earlier Mumbai Police investigation. In January 2023, a sessions court rejected their anticipatory bail applications in connection with the alleged property usurpation case. The prosecution had alleged that the Karolia brothers knew that the original owner had died in 2006 but participated in executing a sale deed by showing Ibrahim Lambat, the complainant’s uncle, as the deceased owner’s father.
The prosecution’s case was that this arrangement helped facilitate the preparation of fraudulent documents and the transfer of the property. The defence, however, reportedly argued that the two brothers had themselves been cheated by co-accused Ibrahim Hasam Lambat. They also claimed to have filed a complaint against him at Pydhonie Police Station and a civil suit seeking damages.
The court rejected their applications for anticipatory bail at that stage, with the investigation requiring further examination of the alleged forgery and the roles of the individuals involved. The rejection of anticipatory bail did not amount to a finding of guilt.
Salim Fruit and Patni had also been arrested in connection with the earlier property case. According to media reports, Salim Fruit and four other accused were arrested in November 2022 as part of the Mumbai Police investigation. The other individuals reported as arrested included Aslam Patni, Sherzada Jangrez Khan, Muslim Asgarali Umretwala and Rizwan Shaikh.
In December 2022, a metropolitan magistrate granted bail to five accused, including Salim Fruit and Patni. Reports stated that they were granted cash bail of ₹50,000 each, subject to conditions that included cooperating with the Anti-Extortion Cell and not tampering with evidence or witnesses.
During the bail proceedings, Patni’s defence reportedly maintained that he had been framed and had no involvement in cheating. His lawyer argued that Patni’s role was limited to selling his share in the property to Salim Fruit’s wife. The ED’s November 2026 press release, however, has alleged that Patni acquired the original owners’ share through threats and coercion before transferring the property to Shazia Salim Iqbal Qureshi.
The ED’s investigation has brought the alleged property transfers and their financial implications under the PMLA framework. Under the law, proceeds of crime include property derived or obtained, directly or indirectly, as a result of criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence. The money-laundering provisions also cover activities involving the possession, acquisition, use, concealment or projection of proceeds of crime as untainted property.
The agency’s allegations concern whether Lambat Building, allegedly obtained through criminal activity, was subsequently transferred through transactions that created an appearance of legitimate ownership. The attachment of the building and bank balances indicates that the ED considers these assets relevant to its ongoing money-laundering investigation.
The ED’s action is provisional and does not mean that the property has been finally confiscated. Under the PMLA, a provisional attachment is followed by proceedings before the Adjudicating Authority, which examines the attachment and the explanations provided by the affected parties. The final outcome depends on the statutory adjudication and subsequent legal proceedings.
The reported historical valuation of Lambat Building has also attracted attention. Earlier media reports referred to a valuation of approximately ₹25 crore for the building in 2016. The ED, however, has stated that the total value of the assets provisionally attached in November 2026 is approximately ₹4 crore. The two figures relate to different reporting contexts, and the ED’s press release does not provide a separate valuation of the building or explain the methodology used to arrive at the aggregate attachment value.
The Lambat Building case also needs to be distinguished from other property-related allegations involving Salim Fruit. Earlier reports have referred to a separate case concerning a building on Bhandari Street in the Masjid Bunder area of Mumbai. That matter involved allegations of forged documents and the alleged acquisition of a 50 per cent interest in another property. It was reportedly registered on August 8, 2022, following a complaint by Mohammad Rafique Ibrahim Tambe and was investigated by the Mumbai Police’s Anti-Extortion Cell. The Bhandari Street matter is separate from the Lambat Building controversy and should not be treated as the same property transaction.
The latest ED action brings the focus back to the alleged transfer of Lambat Building and the circumstances in which its ownership changed. The agency’s investigation centres on allegations that forged documents and impersonation were used in connection with the property, while the original owners’ 50 per cent share was allegedly taken away through threats and coercion. Patni is accused of subsequently transferring the property to Salim Fruit’s wife, with the transactions allegedly creating an appearance of legitimate ownership.
With the provisional attachment of Lambat Building and associated bank balances worth approximately ₹4 crore, the ED has taken action against assets it considers connected to the alleged proceeds of crime. The investigation remains ongoing, and the allegations against the individuals involved have not been established as final findings of guilt by a court.
