Dino Morea Summoned Again by Mumbai EOW in ₹65.54 Crore Mithi River Desilting Case: What We Know

Dino Morea Questioned Again in Mithi River Desilting Case

Actor Dino Morea was summoned again by the Mumbai Police’s Economic Offences Wing (EOW) on October 2, 2026, as investigators continued probing alleged financial irregularities in the Mithi River desilting project. The case concerns an alleged loss of ₹65.54 crore to the Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation (BMC).

Morea had previously been questioned in the case in May 2025 along with his brother Santino Rocco Morea. The latest questioning is understood to have followed investigative leads concerning phone records and business connections involving people already under scrutiny in the case.

Importantly, being questioned or summoned by an investigating agency does not by itself establish wrongdoing. The nature of Morea’s involvement, if any, remains part of the ongoing investigation.

Why Was Dino Morea Summoned Again?

According to information attributed to an EOW officer, investigators came across phone records indicating contact between Morea and people linked to the Mithi River investigation.

Investigators are also examining corporate and financial connections surrounding UBO Ridez Private Limited, a company associated with Morea’s brother. Santino Rocco Morea and Punita Kadam, the wife of accused businessman Ketan Kadam, were directors in the company, according to reporting on the investigation.

The EOW is also examining financial transactions involving Santino Morea and individuals connected to the case.

The investigation is therefore looking beyond the film actor himself and into a wider network of people, companies, transactions and civic contracts.

Morea Had Been Questioned in 2025

This is not the first time Dino Morea has appeared before investigators in connection with the case.

In May 2025, Morea and his brother Santino were questioned after investigators examined phone records and financial transactions connected to people under investigation. At the time, the EOW was also examining the relationship between Ketan Kadam and the Morea family.

The current questioning indicates that investigators are continuing to verify information that emerged during the wider probe.

What Is the ₹65.54 Crore Mithi River Case?

The investigation centres on alleged irregularities in contracts related to the desilting and rejuvenation of Mumbai’s Mithi River, a major waterway whose condition has long been linked to Mumbai’s flood-management concerns.

The EOW has alleged irregularities involving tendering, equipment rentals, work records and payments. Investigators have said that the BMC may have suffered a loss of approximately ₹65.54 crore through the alleged irregularities.

The investigation reportedly covers work undertaken over multiple financial years and involves both private contractors and civic officials.

How the Equipment Tender Became Part of the Probe

One area under investigation concerns the procurement and use of specialised equipment for removing silt from the river.

According to investigators, some BMC officials travelled to Kochi in October 2020 to purchase desilting equipment from Matprop Technical Services Private Limited. Subsequent tender specifications reportedly matched the company's equipment, which investigators say restricted the alternatives available to contractors.

Police have further alleged that contractors who approached Matprop were directed towards other individuals, including Ketan Kadam and Jayesh Joshi, and that equipment was allegedly rented at inflated rates rather than sold.

These are allegations forming part of the investigation and have not been established as final findings by a court.

Who Is Ketan Kadam?

Ketan Kadam is one of the key accused individuals in the case.

He was arrested in May 2025 and was among 13 people booked by the EOW over alleged financial irregularities connected to the Mithi River desilting work. Jayesh Joshi, who was associated with Virgo Specialties Private Limited, was also arrested in the investigation.

The investigation has examined how Kadam's company, Woder India LLP, obtained civic contracts connected with the desilting work.

Investigators Also Examined Allegedly False Work Records

The case expanded further after investigators examined allegations that records were used to overstate the amount of silt removed from the river.

In a separate development within the same investigation, contractor Shersingh Rathod was arrested in August 2025 over allegations that his company submitted photographs and videos that falsely showed silt-removal work. Investigators alleged that bills worth ₹29.63 crore were submitted and cleared.

This part of the investigation illustrates why investigators are examining documentation, equipment usage and payment records alongside personal and business connections.

EOW Investigation Is Still Ongoing

The EOW constituted a Special Investigation Team in August 2024 after allegations of irregularities were raised concerning the desilting of the approximately 17.84-kilometre Mithi River stretch.

The probe has since expanded to include contractors, intermediaries, civic officials and companies associated with the project.

Morea's latest questioning is therefore one part of a considerably wider investigation rather than a standalone inquiry involving the actor.

Reports of Arrest Created Confusion on October 2

There was also conflicting reporting about Morea's status later on October 2.

Some reports claimed that the actor had been arrested after several hours of questioning, while Mid-Day reported that Morea himself denied reports that he had been detained or arrested. Other contemporaneous reports continued to describe the development as questioning by the EOW.

Because of this conflicting information, the safest formulation for publication is that Morea was summoned and questioned by the EOW, while any claim regarding an arrest should be independently confirmed through an official police or court record before being presented as established fact.

What Happens Next?

The EOW is expected to continue examining financial records, communications, company links and the tendering process as investigators work to establish the roles of the various individuals connected to the case.

Morea could face further questioning if investigators require additional clarification. India Today reported that officials indicated further action would depend on the findings of the ongoing investigation.

At this stage, the investigation itself has not established that Dino Morea committed the alleged financial irregularities.

The Celebrity Hour Take

The significance of Dino Morea's latest questioning lies less in the celebrity angle and more in the expanding scope of the Mithi River investigation.

The EOW is examining an alleged ₹65.54-crore loss involving a public infrastructure project, with the investigation spanning tender specifications, equipment rentals, alleged manipulation of work records and financial transactions.

Morea's name has entered the investigation because authorities are examining alleged links and transactions involving people connected to the case. But being questioned is not equivalent to being found guilty.

For The Celebrity Hour, the key development is therefore that investigators have again sought Morea's statement while continuing to trace the financial and corporate network surrounding the alleged irregularities.

The next important developments will be any formal statement from Mumbai Police or the EOW, court proceedings, or evidence establishing a specific role for any individual under investigation.

Sources & Verification

This report was prepared using the supplied report and cross-checked against contemporaneous reporting from multiple established news organisations covering the EOW investigation. Particular care has been taken to distinguish the confirmed questioning of Dino Morea from conflicting reports about his alleged arrest later on October 2. The allegations concerning the Mithi River project are presented as claims under investigation and not as established findings of guilt.

The editorial guidelines supplied with the material specifically require separating confirmed facts, attributed claims and reports rather than presenting unverified allegations as established facts.