Mumbai, May 10, 2022 – The Additional Sessions Judge R.M. Sadrani rejected the bail application of Rahul Nandu Waghmare, accused in a gold theft case registered at L.T. Marg Police Station. The court cited the ongoing investigation, the non-recovery of the stolen gold, and the absconding co-accused as reasons for denying bail.

Waghmare was arrested in connection with Crime No. 90/2022, registered under Sections 379 (theft) and 411 (dishonestly receiving stolen property), read with 34 (acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

According to the prosecution, on March 14, 2022, gold ornaments weighing 145.250 grams, worth Rs. 5,91,240, were stolen from a goldsmith’s shop on Kalbadevi Road. The complainant, Amit Shivram Potale, an employee of the goldsmith, reported the theft. CCTV footage revealed Waghmare removing items from Potale’s bag.

Waghmare was arrested on March 25, 2022. During his custodial interrogation, he allegedly confessed to committing the offense with a wanted co-accused, Nabi Husen @ Chikna Babu.

Waghmare, through his advocates Sheela Gupta and Pawankumar Dhand, sought bail under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).

The prosecution, represented by Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) Abhijeet Gondwal, opposed the bail application.

Judge Sadrani, after reviewing the application and hearing both sides, noted the apparent evidence against Waghmare, the non-recovery of the stolen gold, and the absconding co-accused.

“There is apparent evidence against the applicant. Entire muddemal is yet to be recovered. Co-accused Nabi Husen @ Chikna Babu is yet to be arrested. Investigation is in progress. Considering all these facts, this is not a fit case to grant bail,” Judge Sadrani stated in his order.

Consequently, the court rejected Waghmare’s bail application. The order was dictated on May 9, 2022, and signed and uploaded on May 10, 2022, at 1:05 PM, as certified by stenographer Santosh B. Sawant.

This ruling highlights the judiciary’s approach in considering the progress of investigations and the recovery of stolen property when deciding bail applications. It also underscores the court’s concern for the apprehension of absconding co-accused and the potential impact of bail on ongoing investigations.