1
B.A.483 of 2022
CNR: MHCC02-002691-2022
IN THE SESSIONS COURT FOR GR.BOMBAY
AT BOMBAY
BAIL APPLICATION NO.483 OF 2022
IN
(C.R.NO.23 OF 2022)
Dilip Manjibhai Nayani
Age:46 years, Indian
Inhabitant 25, Adarsh
Society, Hati Mandir
Road, Katar Gaon, Surat.

.. Applicant
V/s.
The State of Maharashta
(at the instance of D.B. Marg
Police Station, Mumbai)
.. Respondent
Appearances:
Adv. Deepak Dere for applicant.
APP Abhijeet Gondwal for Respondent.
Coram : R. M. Sadrani
Addl. Sessions Judge
C.R. No.37.
DATED : 29th March, 2022.
ORDER
1
This is an application U/s.439 of Code of Criminal
Procedure(hereinafter referred to as “Cr.P.C.) for the grant of
regular bail to the applicant Dilip Manjibhai Nayani in C.R.No.23 of
2022 of D.B. Marg Police Station, Mumbai for the offence
2
B.A.483 of 2022
punishable U/s.420, 120B, 109 r/w. 34 of Indian Penal
Code(hereinafter referred to as IPC).
2
Perused the application. Heard both the sides.

3
As per case of the prosecution, informant is Amin M.H.

Ali Mo. Dadabhai resident of Myanmar Country. He is residing with
his friend Vhin E.E. Zhou in India from couple of months.
Informant was having two stones i.e. Natural Rubies worth Rs.5
Crores. He is having business to export diamonds from India to
Myanmar. He came into contact with Isha Dutt through online.
She introduced the co-accused Uday Chokasi. Co-accused Uday
Chokasi informed that applicant Dilip Nayani is having diamond
business and he will purchase the diamonds.

Co-accused Uday
Chokasi called informant at Mumbai and thereafter, taken
informant and his friend to a office in Panchratna Building, Opera
House, Mumbai.

In that
office, co-accused Uday Chokasi
introduced co-accused Vinkal Shah and Pravin @ Pappu Jain.
When informant inquired about applicant Dilip Nayani, co-accused
Uday Chokasi informed that as per his instruction, they were
brought in that office. Thereafter, informant showed Rubies with
him to co-accused Vinkal Shah. Said Vinkal Shah showed diamond
in exchange of said Rubies.

However, informant did not like
diamond of Vinkal Shah. Further, said Vinkal Shah called him on
next day i.e. on 01/02/2022. At that time, co-accused Pravin @
Pappu Jain, Uday Chokasi, Khetaram Devasi and Suresh Borda
were present. In their presence, Vinkal Shah showed his willingness
3
B.A.483 of 2022
to purchase Rubies of the informant. Meanwhile, other accused
kept the informant busy in talking and systematically packet with
the Rubies was exchanged with the packet of duplicate Rubies.
Thereafter, informant went to Royal Casal Hotel at August Kranti
Maidan. Mumbai. After taking meal, he checked the packet and
noticed that Rubies were exchanged and duplicate Rubies were
kept in the packet. Accordingly, he lodged FIR. Said Rubies are
recovered from co-accused Vinkal Shah.
4
Learned Adv.Deepak Dere for applicant argued that
muddemal is already recovered. Maximum punishment prescribed
for the offence is seven years. There is no specific allegation who
exchanged packet of Rubies with the duplicate Rubies and that is
matter of trial. There is no allegation against applicant Dilip
Nayani. He was not present at the time of offence. It is requested
to allow the application.
5
On the contrary, learned APP Abhijeet Gondwal and
investigating officer opposed the application and argued that
applicant alongwith co-accused are working in a Gang. During test
identification parade, informant identified the persons who were
present at the time of exchange of packet. There is criminal
antecedent against the applicant.

It is requested to reject the
application.
6
record.

After hearing both the sides, I have gone through
FIR is registered against co-accused Vinkal Shah, Uday
4
B.A.483 of 2022
Chokasi, Pravin @ Pappu Jain, Khetaram Devasi and Suresh Borda.
Applicant was nowhere present. His name was referred by the coaccused Uday Chokasi that applicant called him for purchase of
Rubies from the informant. However, when informant reached the
office, at that time, applicant was not there. Except this, there is no
other role. There is no any talk between the applicant and the
informant. Considering the role assigned to the applicant, I am
inclined to allow the application. Hence, I pass following order.
ORDER
1
Bail Application No.483 of 2022 is hereby allowed.

2
Applicant Dilip Manjibhai Nayani 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/- with one or more sureties
of the same amount. In addition to this, applicant to deposit cash
surety of Rs.50,000/-.
3
Applicant to furnish his detailed address, phone number
at the time of furnishing bail.
4
Bail before the Court attending remand.

5
Applicant to attend D.B. Marg Police Station, Mumbai
on every Friday in between 11.00 a.m. to 2.00 p.m. till further
orders.

5
6
B.A.483 of 2022
Applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any
inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the
facts of the accusation against himself so as to dissuade him from
disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.
7
Applicant shall not leave India without previous
permission of the Court.
8
Bail Application is disposed off accordingly.

( R. M. Sadrani )
Addl. Sessions Judge, Sessions Court,
Dated :29/03/2022.
Gr. Mumbai
Dictated on
:29/03/2022.
Transcribed on :29/03/2022.
Signed on
:29/03/2022.

6
B.A.483 of 2022
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED
JUDGMENT/ORDER.
UPLOADED ON:30/03/2022.
TIME:3.00 p.m.

(Santosh B. Sawant)
(Selection Grade Stenographer)
Name of the Judge(with Court Room Shri. R. M. Sadrani, Judge, C.R.No.37.
No.)
Date
of
pronouncement
Judgment /Order
of 29/03/2022.

Judgment/Order signed by P.O. on
29/03/2022.

Judgment/Order uploaded on
30/03/2022.