MUMBAI, Oct. 19 -- In a major setback to the politically influential Patil Nilangekar family of Latur, the Aurangabad bench of the Bombay high court has rejected discharge applications filed by Arvind Patil Nilangekar and his brother-in-law, Ashish Marwah, in an alleged bank loan fraud case involving Union Bank of India and Bank of Maharashtra. The case concerns a loan account of Rs.49.20 crore linked to Victoria Agro Food Processing Private Limited. The ruling clears the way for the criminal trial of the two accused to proceed. In its October 13, 2026 order, the court held that the prosecution material raised "grave suspicion" and disclosed sufficient grounds to continue the proceedings. The development assumes political significance as Arvind Patil Nilangekar is contesting the November 15 election to the board of directors of the Latur District Central Cooperative Bank. Arvind is the brother of BJP MLA and former minister Sambhaji Patil Nilangekar and the grandson of former Maharashtra chief minister Shivajirao Patil Nilangekar. The high court's decision comes despite the two public sector banks having settled the NPA account for Rs.25.50 crore against outstanding dues of Rs.49.20 crore through an OTS in February 2018. Expanding on this, the court observed that the loan account being settled under an OTS did not furnish a ground for discharge. "The settlement may have consequences in relation to the bank's recovery proceedings and civil liability. It does not, by itself, erase the allegations of forgery, cheating or conspiracy said to have been committed earlier," it said. Victoria Agro Food Processing Pvt Ltd, of which Arvind Patil-Nilangekar's sister, Prajakta Marwah, and Ashish Marwah were directors, was incorporated in 2008 to establish a grain-based distillery, and obtained loan facilities from Union Bank of India and Bank of Maharashtra for this. The company was sanctioned a term loan of Rs.33.53 crore and a cash-credit facility of Rs.6.46 crore, taking the total sanctioned facilities to Rs.39.99 crore. The agency's charge sheet said that the original mortgage deed, registered on July 30, 2009, described the secured property as Survey/Gat No. 289/A, measuring approximately 1.61 hectare, along with a constructed area of around 28,740 square feet. However, during subsequent recovery proceedings, a copy of the deed produced on behalf of the borrower and guarantors allegedly described the property as Survey No. 5/A, measuring just 740 square feet. The CBI alleged that pages 17 and 29 of the registered document had been substituted. When contacted, Arvind Patil-Nilangekar rejected the allegations, maintaining that he was merely a guarantor for the loan and was neither a borrower nor a director of the company....