The Supreme Court acquitted jeweler Nandkumar Babulal Soni in a ₹6.7 crore fraud case, ruling that mere possession of stolen gold bars doesn’t warrant conviction without proof of knowledge or involvement.
In a significant judgment on February 25, 2025, the Supreme Court of India acquitted Nandkumar Babulal Soni, a jeweler, who was convicted under Section 411 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for possessing stolen gold bars linked to the high-profile ₹6.7 crore fraud case involving Vijaya Bank. The case revolved around the fraudulent use of fake Telegraphic Transfers (TTs), leading to the purchase of gold bars. The Court’s decision was based on the failure of the prosecution to prove that the appellant had knowledge or reason to believe that the property in question was stolen.
Key Points of the Supreme Court’s Judgment:
- Mere Possession Not Enough for Conviction:
The Court emphasized that possession of stolen property alone does not lead to a conviction under Section 411 IPC unless it is proven that the accused had knowledge or reason to believe the property was stolen. - Prosecution's Failure to Prove Knowledge:
The prosecution was unable to establish that the gold bars seized from the jeweler were part of the fraudulently acquired assets linked to the fake TTs. The Court noted that knowledge of theft was essential for conviction, and since this was not proven, the conviction could not be upheld. - Reference to Legal Precedent:
Relying on the Trimbak vs. State of M.P. (AIR 1954 SC 39) case, the Court reiterated that the prosecution must prove the following:- The accused was in possession of the stolen property.
- The property was in someone else’s possession before the accused.
- The accused had knowledge that the property was stolen.
- Absence of Direct Link to Fraudulent Activities:
Although the appellant had purchased the gold bars from jewelers M/s. CN and M/s. V.B. Jewellers, the Court noted that the prosecution failed to show that the appellant knew the demand drafts used for these purchases had been obtained through fraudulent means. - Burden of Proof on the Prosecution:
The Supreme Court emphasized that the prosecution must prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt, completing the chain of circumstances against the accused. In this case, the prosecution had not established a direct connection between the gold bars and the fraudulent activities. - Acquittal and Return of Seized Gold Bars:
The Court overturned the High Court’s decision that had upheld the appellant’s conviction. It directed the return of 205 gold bars seized from the jeweler’s firm, noting that the appellant was entitled to possession since the prosecution failed to prove the property was stolen.
Case Background:
The case arose from a fraudulent banking scheme at Vijaya Bank, Nasik, during the late 1990s, involving the opening of a fictitious account under the name M/s. Globe International. The fraud involved fake TTs, leading to the deposit of ₹6.7 crore into the account. The money was then used to purchase gold bars, which were traced to several individuals, including Nandkumar Babulal Soni.
Court's Ruling:
- The Supreme Court found that the prosecution failed to prove the link between the stolen money and the seized gold bars. As a result, the Court acquitted the appellant of all charges and directed the return of the seized gold bars to him.
Legal Representation:
- For the Appellant (Nandkumar Babulal Soni):
Senior Advocate Mr. Uday Gupta, along with a team of advocates including Mr. Hiren Dasan, Mr. Chand Qureshi, and others. - For the Respondents (State of Maharashtra):
Advocates Mr. Upmanyu Tewari, Mrs. V.D. Khanna, and a team of counsel.
Case Title: NANDKUMAR BABULAL SONI VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. ETC. ETC.
Attachment:
