Nitin S/O Madanlal Jain vs. The State Of Maharashtra
Original PDF →Facts
The applicant, Nitin S/o. Madanlal Jain (Accused No.4), sought bail in connection with a criminal case registered for offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The prosecution alleged that the informant, a manager at M/s. Dhanraj Precious Metals Pvt. Ltd., agreed to exchange gold bangles for gold bars with a person claiming to be from M/s. Navkar Jewels. The exchange took place in a lane, and the gold bars were later found to be fake, made of copper and zinc. The applicant is alleged to have received 14 gold bangles and sold them for Rs. 45,00,000/-, retaining the amount. The Trial Court had denied bail, citing a prima facie case and the applicant's seven prior criminal antecedents. The applicant offered to deposit Rs. 25,00,000/- in the Trial Court, to be withdrawn by the informant.
Held
The Court found a prima facie case against the applicant and acknowledged his criminal antecedents. However, it also considered the applicant's stepmother's need for his support and his voluntary undertaking to deposit Rs. 25,00,000/- in the Trial Court, with no objection to the informant withdrawing the amount. The Court noted that the applicant was on bail in all his previous cases. Consequently, the Court was inclined to allow the bail application. The applicant was ordered to be released on bail upon executing a bond and furnishing sureties. He was also directed to deposit Rs. 15,00,000/- before release and an additional Rs. 10,00,000/- within four weeks, with the informant at liberty to withdraw these amounts without prejudice to the parties' rights. The applicant must also mark attendance at the police station monthly, attend court proceedings regularly, not tamper with evidence, not influence witnesses, and keep the investigating officer updated on his contact details and address. He is also prohibited from indulging in similar activities. Any observations made were clarified to be for the bail application only and not to influence the trial.
Key Issues
1. Whether the applicant is entitled to be released on bail in light of the prima facie case against him and his criminal antecedents, considering his offer to deposit a substantial sum and his submission regarding his stepmother's medical condition? The applicant argued that, at most, he could be charged with receiving stolen property, not organized crime. He emphasized his readiness to deposit Rs. 15,00,000/- before release and an additional Rs. 10,00,000/- within four weeks, with no objection to the informant withdrawing the entire amount. He also highlighted his stepmother's ongoing dialysis and need for continuous medical treatment, necessitating his presence. He further stated he is on bail in all previous cases. The State argued that there was sufficient material against the applicant and that his seven criminal antecedents warranted refusal of bail.
Sections Cited
Sections 316(5), 317(2), 318(4), 319(2), 61(2), 3(5), 111(2)(b), (3), (4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
SA_MANDAWGAD 8 BA 3268-26.DOC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURI ICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO. 3268 OF 2026 Nitin S/o. Madanlal Jain … Applicant V/S. State of Maharashtra … Respondent Mr. Rizwan Merchant i/by Mr. Randhir Kale, for the applicant. Ms. K.T. Hiwrale, APP for Respondent–State. Mr. Ajay Kadam, PI, Pydhonie Police Station, present. CORAM: SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J. DATED : 28th SEPTEMBER, 2026 P.C. :-
Heard learned Counsel for the parties. Perused the record.
The applicant (Accused No.4) seeks his release on bail in connection with C.R. No. 276 of 2026, registered with Pydhonie Police Station, Mumbai, for the offence punishable under Sections 316(5), 317(2), 318(4), 319(2), 61(2), 3(5) and Sections 111(2)(b), (3) and (4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short, “BNS”), on the report dated 20th March, 2026 filed by Mr.Prashant Krushna Tawade – informant.
The prosecution case is that the informant, has been working as a Manager with M/s. Dhanraj Precious Metals Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai. On 18th March, 2026, the informant received a call from a person who introduced himself as Manish Jain and claimed to be speaking on behalf of M/s. Navkar Jewels, Hyderabad. Further, the two had a talk regarding gold business during which the informant agreed to provide 14 bangles of 22-carat gold weighing 309.11 grams in consideration of gold bars weighing 300 SANJAY ASARAM MANDAWGAD ASARAM MANDAWGAD Date: 2026.09.29 18:56:45 +0530
SA_MANDAWGAD 8 BA 3268-26.DOC grams to be given by said Manish Jain. It was agreed that the exchange of the said gold properties would be done in the office of K. Ambalal Angadia. However, apprehending raid by GST authority and due to crowd, the gold was exchanged in a lane New Jai Hind Hotel, Masjid Bunder. Later on, when the gold bars were tested at Zaveri Bazar, they were found to be fake, being made of copper and zinc. Therefore, the aforesaid crime came to be registered and the accused persons were arrested. It is alleged that Accused No.1 impersonated himself as Manish Jain, who was identified in the TIP by the informant. It is alleged that the applicant has received 14 gold bangles, which he further sold for Rs.45,00,000/- to Accused Nos.5 and 6 and kept the amount with him. Accordingly, all the Accused persons stood charge-sheeted.
The Trial Court declined to release the applicant on bail for two reasons, that there is a prima facie case against the applicant and that, he has similar seven criminal antecedents.
Mr. Merchant, learned counsel for the applicant, has submitted that, considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, maximum, the applicant can be charged for the offence of receiving the stolen property, but, certainly not for the charge of the organized crime. However, the applicant is ready to deposit Rs.15,00,000/- in the Trial Court before his release on bail and an additional amount of Rs.10,00,000/- within four weeks from his release from jail. Mr. Merchant, on instructions, submits that the applicant hereby gives his no objection for withdrawing of the entire amount of Rs.25,00,000/- from the Trial Court by the informant on behalf of M/s. Dhanraj Precious Metals Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai and, the applicant would not object for the same. SA_MANDAWGAD 8 BA 3268-26.DOC However, the said deposit will be without prejudice to the rights, defence and contentions to be raised by the parties before the Trial Court as well as any other proceedings arising out of the present crime. He submitted that in all the earlier cases, the applicant is on bail. In addition, Mr. Merchant submitted that the applicant’s step mother is on dialysis for last six years. She is in need of continuous medical treatment. To substantiate this statement, Mr.Merchant tendered the compilation of medical papers which is taken on record (marked “X”). He submitted that the presence of the applicant with his mother is essential. Therefore, bail be granted.
Ms. Hiwrale, learned APP, on the other hand submitted that there is sufficient material against the applicant of having committed this offence along with the co-accused persons. The applicant has 7 criminal antecedents. Therefore, bail be refused.
I have considered the submissions. Considering the material on record, I have found a prima facie case against the applicant of having committed the present offence. However, it cannot be ignored that the applicant's step mother is in need of his support. The applicant is ready to deposit Rs.25,00,000/- as above and has given his no objection to withdraw that money by the informant. The applicant is on bail in all the earlier cases. Therefore, I am inclined to allow the application. Hence, Order :- (i) Applicant - Nitin Madanlal Jain be released on bail in aforesaid FIR registered with Pydhonie Police Station, Mumbai, on his executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount. SA_MANDAWGAD 8 BA 3268-26.DOC (a) As voluntarily undertaken, before his release from jail, the applicant shall deposit Rs.15,00,000/- in the Trial Court and additional Rs.10,00,000/- within four weeks thereafter. (b) The informant is at liberty to withdraw the said entire amount on behalf of M/s.Dhanraj Precious Metals Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai, as and when deposited. (c) The deposit and withdrawal of the said amount shall be without prejudice to the rights, defence and contentions of the parties to be raised before the trial Court and, in any other proceedings that may arise out of the present crime. Similarly, the said deposit shall not be construed as an admission of guilt in this crime by the applicant. (ii) The applicant shall mark his attendance at Pydhonie Police Station, Mumbai on 1st day of each month between 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. till conclusion of the trial. (iii) The applicant shall regularly attend the proceedings before the juri ictional Court unless exempted by the said Court, for the reasons to be recorded in writing. (iv) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence and shall not directly or indirectly influence upon the prosecution witnesses to prevent them from deposing against him. (v) On being released from jail, the applicant shall furnish his contact number and residential address to the Investigating Officer and shall keep him updated, in case there is any change. SA_MANDAWGAD 8 BA 3268-26.DOC (vi) The applicant shall not indulge in identical activities for which he has been arraigned in this case. (vii) In case of breach of aforesaid conditions, the Respondent/s will be at liberty to seek cancellation of bail from the trial Court. (vii) It is clarified that any observation made in the present Order are for the purpose of deciding the present Bail Application and should not influence the outcome of the trial and also not be taken as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
Bail Application stands disposed of in aforesaid terms. (SHYAM C. CHANDAK, J.)
Reproduced from the public record of the Bombay High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.