HC dismisses MCOCA charges against man accused of buying stolen gold

The Bombay High Court dismissed proceedings under MCOCA against Mahesh Pankaj Soni, accused of buying stolen gold ornaments. The court found no evidence of his involvement in the alleged robbery or organized crime. Soni argued that he had no connection with the gang leader and that the gold melting machine found in his possession was not incriminating as he owns a jewelry shop. The court agreed with Soni's arguments and dismissed the case.

Mumbai: The Bombay high court on Friday dismissed proceedings initiated under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 (MCOCA), against Mahesh Pankaj Soni, who was accused of buying stolen gold ornaments from robber Ayub Alimuddin Shaikh, aka Ayub Chikna.

HT Image

According to the court, there is no material evidence to show that he was part of the organised crime syndicate, nor is there any evidence to show that he was primarily involved in the alleged robbing.

A bench of justice Revati Mohite Dere and justice Gauri Godse was hearing Soni’s appeal after the sessions court in Mumbai rejected his application for discharge.

The case revolved around an alleged robbery that took place on April 6, 2019, in Chinchpokli, South Mumbai. According to the police, five men attacked another man with an iron chopper and robbed him of gold ornaments worth nearly ₹56 lakh. This, according to them, was the work of Ayub Chikna, who, along with others in his syndicate, has undertaken numerous dacoities in the past. The police alleged that Soni, and his father, Pankaj Soni, were part of the syndicate.

The police say that the father-son duo purchased gold ornaments from Chikna’s second wife, knowing that the ornaments were stolen. They had further accused them of melting the gold ornaments to destroy their identity.

However, according to Soni, he has no connections with gang leader Chikna, who has 39 cases registered against him. Moreover, the only material evidence against him is the gold melting machine recovered from him and the call data records with Chikna’s wife.

Since Soni and his father own a jewellery shop named Riddhi Siddhi Jewellers, there is nothing unusual about the gold melting machine he maintains. Additionally, his father made the alleged phone calls with Chikna’s wife using his mobile. Also, the stolen ornaments were never recovered from Soni; only two gold bars weighing 1175 grams were recovered from his father and not from him, he argued.

After evaluating both sides, HC found substance in Soni’s arguments. The mere recovery of gold melting machines cannot be incriminating since he runs a jewellery shop with his father, the court said.

“Recovery of gold melting machines from the appellant’s shop at the instance of the appellant can’t be a circumstance to implicate the appellant since it is not unusual that there was a gold melting machine in the appellant’s shop as he is a jeweller.”

The court also regarded the calls from the wife of the accused as ordinary, as there is nothing unusual about receiving calls from various people. The call itself cannot be incriminating when nothing was recovered from Soni, the court said.