1
BA 852/22
MHCC020048232022
IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS FOR GREATER BOMBAY
BAIL APPLICATION No. 852 OF 2022
Pruthvi s/o. Niranjankumar Soni
Age : 21 years, Occu : Student,
R/o.: 1, Sarvanand Society,
Near Baliyadev Mandir, Science City Road,
Sola, Daskroi, Ahmedabad, Gujrat – 380 060.

… Applicant
­ Versus ­
The State of Maharashtra
(Through Santacruz police
station, vide Cr. No.106/2022)
… Respondent
Appearance :­
Mr. J. M. Gawli, Advocate for applicant.
Mr. Shankar Erande, A.P.P. for respondent.

CORAM : SHRI. U. M. PADWAD,
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE,
COURT ROOM No. 30.
DATED : 02/05/2022.
ORDER
.

Perused application, reply and record. Heard parties.

2]
The accused alongwith his maternal uncle and other
accused has allegedly been part of cheating the Tanishq Company.
Indisputably, maternal uncle of the accused was an employee with
Tanishq, a jewellery brand. He purchased certain gold from one of the
2
BA 852/22
outlets of Tanishq and gave gold coins towards the price thereof. Said
gold coins were also sold by Tanishq itself and the same were accepted
in stead of other currency. After the sale the gold coins were sent to the
factory where the same were found to be made of silver with gold plate.
The informant, another employee of Tanishq, then lodged the report.
3]
The accused claims that his name is not mentioned in the
report and he only accompanied his maternal uncle to the said shop. He
did not have any other role and as such his detention is no more
required.
4]
It is however to be noted that it has been observed during
investigation that the maternal uncle of the accused had purchased gold
from Tanishq in exchange with the gold coins many times and on all
such occasions the present accused was with him. It appears that the
maternal uncle of the accused being employee of Tanishq had exploited
certain loopholes in the said scheme run by Tanishq to sell ornaments in
exchange of gold coins. Whether the present accused had accompanied
his maternal uncle on so many occasions to Tanishq only coincidently or
was it the part of a ploy is itself a matter for further investigation. The
maternal uncle of the accused is still absconding. The total jewellery
purchased by the other accused is worth Rs. 53,90,147/­ from various
outlets in Mumbai. Further probe into such instances is still going on.
The property embezzled is still to be recovered. Release of the present
accused is likely to be an impediment in recovery of those ornaments
and arrest of the other accused. The offence committed is quite serious.
The accused simply because he claims to be a student cannot be shown
any unwarranted latitude at this very initial stage. Considering the
gravity and scope of the offence the investigating agency also needs to
3
BA 852/22
be given sufficient time to make further headway. The accused thus is
not entitled for bail. Hence the order :­
ORDER
Application is rejected.
Digitally signed
by UDAY
MANOHARRAO
UDAY
PADWAD
MANOHARRAO
Date:
PADWAD
2022.05.04
15:12:27
+0930
( U. M. Padwad )
Date : 02/05/2022.

Additional Sessions Judge,
Gr. Mumbai.
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED ORDER.”
04/05/2022
11:10 a.m.

UPLOAD DATE
TIME
V. V. Kulkarni
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (With Court H. H. Additional Sessions Judge
Room No.)
Shri. U. M. Padwad,
Court Room No. 30.
Date of Pronouncement of ORDER 02/05/2022
ORDER signed by P.O. on
02/05/2022
ORDER uploaded on
04/05/2022