Meanwhile, a conspiracy was already hatched between Mishra and two other accused, Sharad Pabrekar and Nilesh Nandgaonkar, who were to pose as purchasers.
A mere confusion over the handing over of the device that is used to store CCTV footage of a theft, has helped an accused get an acquittal in a diamond theft case. The court cited technical grounds to let go the accused for robbing a diamond worth Rs50 lakh.
The case dates back to 2014, when accused Satish Mishra, had approached a diamond merchant, Gyanprakash Gaud, who was wanting to sell of a diamond. Mishra posed himself as an agent in dealing and arranging for a meeting between Gaud and the potential purchaser.
Meanwhile, a conspiracy was already hatched between Mishra and two other accused, Sharad Pabrekar and Nilesh Nandgaonkar, who were to pose as purchasers.
Mishra accordingly arranged for a meeting between the accused and Gowd at Mathura lodge, Girgaon. On the day of the incident, Pabrekar and Nandgaonkar occupied seats in the hotel posing as purchasers. A few minutes later, Mishra came with Gowd and a meeting initiated between the four.
The two accused asked Gowd to show the diamond, so as to verify its authenticity. Gowd accordingly showed the diamond to them. The accused on the pretext of looking at the gem in the light, kept it in its pocket and walked away. Stunned Gowd not knowing how to react tried to stop them, when Nandgaonkar assaulted him on his hand with a pocket knife, and later all three eloped.
A complaint was registered against the three with the VP road police station. The police checked for the CCTV footage and accordingly, the accused were arrested. They recovered the diamond from the accused and returned it to Gowd.
Advocate Santosh Deshpande, who was appearing on behalf of the accused claimed, "There were a lot of technical discrepancies in the case. Initially, the police had discharged Mishra from the case on the grounds that there was no evidence against him and was made a witness, but later, the court, during the time of recording the evidence, found that there were enough evidence against him and was again made an accused in the case.
Further, when I asked the police officer to reveal the device used to collect the CCTV footage, the police claimed it to be a compact disc (CD). But, the panchnama mentions the device used in storing the CCTV footage to be a pen-drive."
Advocate Deshpande further mentioned that: "As per the FIR, the diamond was worth Rs75 lakh, but the complainant said that it was worth Rs50 lakh. Also, there neither was certification of the diamond nor certification for the collection of CCTV footage. Thus, all these technical glitches led the accused towards an acquittal."
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
 "dna")
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
)
)
)
)
)
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}
){kind=small}