Mumbai, May 10, 2022 – The Additional Sessions Judge R.M. Sadrani granted bail to Sureshbhai Karshanbhai Borad, Khetaram Rangaji Devasi, and Vinkal Girish Shah, accused in a case of theft involving natural rubies. The court cited the completion of the investigation, the recovery of the stolen rubies, and the fact that the offenses are triable by a Magistrate’s Court as reasons for granting bail.

The applicants were arrested in connection with Crime No. 23 of 2022, registered at D.B. Marg Police Station, for offenses under Sections 420 (cheating), 120B (criminal conspiracy), 109 (abetment), read with 34 (acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

According to the prosecution, the complainant, Amin M.H. Ali Mo. Dadabhai, a resident of Myanmar, was in possession of two natural rubies worth Rs. 5 crores. He was introduced to the accused through an online contact, Isha Dutt, and co-accused Uday Harischandra Chokasi, who claimed that co-accused Dilip Nayani would purchase the rubies. The complainant was taken to an office in Panchratna Building, Opera House, Mumbai, where he met Vinkal Shah (applicant no. 3) and Pravin @ Pappu Jain. During a subsequent meeting, the rubies were allegedly exchanged with duplicate stones.

The applicants, through their advocate Deepak Dere, sought bail under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), arguing that the stolen rubies had been recovered, the maximum punishment for the offense was seven years, and there was no specific allegation identifying who exactly exchanged the packets.

The prosecution, represented by Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) Abhijeet Gondwal, did not object to the bail but requested a suitable order.

Judge Sadrani, after hearing both sides and perusing the record, noted that the rubies had been recovered from Vinkal Shah (applicant no. 3), the investigation was complete, and the charge sheet had been filed. The court also noted that an earlier bail application (B.A. No. 484 of 2022) had been rejected on March 29, 2022, when the investigation was still in progress.

“Diamonds are recovered from applicant No.3 Vinkal Shah. Investigation is over and chargesheet is filed. Earlier B.A.No.484 of 2022 was rejected on 29/03/2022, observing that investigation is in progress. Considering the nature of punishment and all the offences are triable by the Magistrate’s Court, I am inclined to allow the application.” Said Judge Sadrani.

Consequently, the court granted bail to the applicants, ordering each of them to execute a personal bond of Rs. 50,000 with one surety of the same amount. The court also ordered each applicant to deposit a cash surety of Rs. 50,000. Additionally, the court imposed the following conditions:

• The applicants must furnish their detailed address and phone number at the time of furnishing bail.
• The applicants must appear before the court attending remand.
• The applicants must not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case.
• The applicants must not leave India without the court’s permission.

“Applicant No.1 Sureshbhai Karshanbhai Borad, applicant No.2 Khetaram Rangaji Devasi and applicant No.3 Vinkal Girish Shah in C.R.No.23 of 2022 of D.B. Marg Police Station, Mumbai for the offence punishable U/s.420, 120B, 109 r/w. 34 of Indian Penal Code be released on bail on executing PR bond of Rs.50,000/- each with one surety each of the same amount. In addition to this, applicants to deposit cash surety of Rs.50,000/- each. Applicants to furnish their detailed address, phone number at the time of furnishing bail. Bail before the Court attending remand. Applicants shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the accusation against themselves so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer. Applicants shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court.” Judge Sadrani ordered.

The order was dictated, transcribed, and signed on May 10, 2022, and uploaded on the same day, as certified by stenographer Santosh B. Sawant.

This ruling highlights the judiciary’s approach in considering the completion of the investigation and the recovery of stolen property when deciding bail applications. It also underscores the importance of the nature of the offense and the court’s jurisdiction in such matters.