Mumbai court refuses to discharge Mint employee accused of stealing two Rs 20 coins
India Today
On July 24, 2020, the 55-year-old accused allegedly committed the theft of two coins of Rs 20 each (not yet available as currency) from the Mint and kept them in his locker.
The Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court at Ballard Pier in Mumbai has refused to discharge a Mint employee who was caught with two Rs 20 coins in his locker. These coins are not yet available as currency.
The 55-year-old Chabukswar was serving as a Bullion Accountant with the India Government Mint. On July 24, 2020, around 3 am, he allegedly committed the theft of two coins of Rs 20 each from the Mint and kept those coins in his locker within the Mint premises.
Those coins were seized from the locker of Chabukswar in the presence of two witnesses. Based on the report lodged by the inspector of CISF, an FIR was registered at the MRA Marg police station in Mumbai under Section 381 (theft by clerk or servant of property in possession of a master) of the Indian Penal Code.
ALSO READ: Maharashtra: 17-year-old stabs boy to death over tiff in Palghar
Chabukswar had filed anticipatory bail applications, but it was rejected. He was arrested in December 2020.
Chabukswar denied all the allegations levelled against him by stating that he had worked with the Mint for nearly 33 years and had even been awarded the Best Employee Award in 2018. Even his father served the Mint for 40 years, and he does not have a criminal past. He argued that there are three exit points, one after the other, at the Coining Department of the Mint, where all the employees are checked thoroughly with the help of a metal detector. Chabukswar stated that he, being a Bullion Accountant, had no business related to physically handling the coins. He argued that he had been falsely implicated in the crime.
After the charge sheet against him was filed by the police, Chabukeswar moved the discharge plea stating that there is no material evidence against him that could lead to his prosecution and he should not be made to go through the rigours of trial. He also argued that the person who had informed the authorities that the coins were in his locker had not mentioned how he got to know about the presence of coins.
