Applicant sought anticipatory bail in two FIRs under Sections 409 and 420 IPC for misappropriating diamonds entrusted on jangad. The court found prima facie material showing the applicant's involvement and criminal antecedents, declined discretion, and rejected both anticipatory bail applications.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Digitally signed by CHITRA CHITRA SANJAY SANJAY SONAWANE Chitra Sonawane. SONAWANE Date: 2024.08.19 23:13:43 +0530
12-aba-1863-2023(corrected).doc
[Corrected as per speaking to minutes order dated 19/08/2024]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1863 of 2023
Dhanraj Prithviraj Jain Indian Inhabitant, age 57 years, Occ.: --, R/at. 503, Vora Castle, MG Road, Dahanukar, Kandivali West, Mumbai. ...Applicant Vs. The State of Maharashtra through Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai – 400 103. ...Respondent
With
Interim Application No. 311 of 2024
in
Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1863 of 2023 Manishkumar Lavjibhai Vaghani Age 43, Office at AE 4032D, Bharat Diamond Bourse, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai – 51. ...Orig. Complainant/ Intervenor
In the matter between Dhanraj Prithviraj Jain Indian Inhabitant, age 57 years, Occ.: Business, R/at. 1303, Vora Castle, MG Road, Dahanukar Wadi, Kandivali West, Mumbai. ...Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra
Page 1 of 6
_______________________________________ 11 July 2024
Chitra Sonawane.
12-aba-1863-2023(corrected).doc
The Senior Inspector of Police, (Bandra Kurla Complex Police Station, Mumbai) (CR No.228 of 2023)
...Respondent
With
Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1868 of 2023 Dhanraj Prithviraj Jain Indian Inhabitant, age 57 years, Occ.: Business, R/at. 1303, Vora Castle, MG Road, Dahanukar Wadi, Kandivali West, Mumbai. ...Applicant Vs.
Anticipatory Bail Application No. 1868 of 2023 Arvind Suresh Gabbani Age 43 years, Office at FW, 4150, Bharat Diamond Bourse, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra East, Mumbai – 51. ...Orig. Complainant/ Intervenor
In the matter between Dhanraj Prithviraj Jain Indian Inhabitant, age 57 years, Occ.: Business, R/at. 1303, Vora Castle, MG Road, Dahanukar Wadi, Kandivali West, Mumbai. ...Applicant Vs. State of Maharashtra
Page 2 of 6
_______________________________________ 11 July 2024
Chitra Sonawane.
12-aba-1863-2023(corrected).doc
The Senior Inspector of Police (Bandra Kurla Complex Police Station, Mumbai) (C.R. No.228 of 2023)
...Respondent
Mr Deepak Dere, for the Applicants in both ABAs. Mr Shantanu Sharma, for the Intervenors/ complainants. Mr Nitin Patil, APP, for the Respondent – State. PSI Vijay Thosar, BKC Police Station, Mumbai, is present.
Coram: R. N. Laddha, J. Date: 11 July 2024
P.C.:
Heard Mr Deepak Dere, the learned Counsel for the applicant, Mr Nitin Patil, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent/ State, and Mr Shantanu Sharma, the learned Counsel for the intervenors/ complainants.
Page 3 of 6
11 July 2024
Chitra Sonawane.
12-aba-1863-2023(corrected).doc
Chitra Sonawane.
12-aba-1863-2023(corrected).doc
complainants for the diamonds. In a jangad transaction, the owner of the goods entrusts them to a person, who may be an agent or a merchant, for showing them to an intending purchaser upon conditions mentioned in the jangad receipt/ acknowledgement of entrustment. If the intending purchaser does not purchase the goods, the terms usually require the agent or the merchant to return them to its owner. A perusal of the FIRs reveals that the applicant negotiated with the complainants for the diamonds. Accordingly, the diamonds and the jangad receipts were handed over to the complainants’ brokers for delivering them to the applicant. These diamonds were delivered to the applicant in the presence of a witness. Once the diamonds were entrusted to the applicant, he informed the complainants about the sale negotiations with the intending purchasers. When the sale did not materialise, the complainants demanded the applicant return the diamonds or pay the consideration, which he did not do. Prima facie, the applicant appears to be the beneficiary of the diamonds, which are to be recovered. There is material to indicate the applicant’s involvement in the crimes. The investigation is in progress. Moreover, the applicant has criminal antecedents.
Page 5 of 6
11 July 2024
Chitra Sonawane.
12-aba-1863-2023(corrected).doc
applications stand disposed of.
(R. N. Laddha, J.)
Page 6 of 6
11 July 2024
1 issue framed by the court
Whether pre-arrest bail should be granted to the applicant in two FIRs alleging misappropriation of diamonds entrusted on jangad.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Dhanraj Prithviraj Jain
State of Maharashtra
Manishkumar Lavjibhai Vaghani
Arvind Suresh Gabbani
R. N. Laddha
As recorded by the court registry
11 orders share this CNR
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
