Deepak Choudhary v. The State Of Bihar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.18126 of 2016 Arising Out of PS.Case No. -275 Year- 2015 Thana -KOTWALI District- MUNGER ====================================================== Deepak Choudhary son of Ram Pratap Choudhary, resident of VillageNimtalla Munger, Police Station Kotwali, District- Munger. .... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
The State of Bihar .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sanjeev Ranjan For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. M.K.Nirala(App) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JITENDRA MOHAN SHARMA ORAL ORDER 04-07-2016 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned A.P.P for the State.
The petitioner seeks bail in a case for the offences punishable under sections 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 of the Immoral Trafficking (Prevention) Act.
Allegedly, the house of the petitioner was raided and Ruby Kumari and two other girls, namely, Sapna and Rabina Praveen were recovered. Ruby Kumari stated that she was brought by one Pappu at the house of the petitioner and was indulged in immoral trafficking.
Submission is of false implication and that the petitioner is in custody since 19.12.2015, the victim girls Rabina Praveen and Sapna in their statements recorded under section 164 of the Cr.P.C. have stated that they were doing the business of
Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.18126 of 2016 (5) dt.04-07-2016 2/2 flash trade out of their own consent and other co-accused Md. Shah Alam has been allowed bail and the petitioner by remaining in custody now has been sufficiently penalized. The learned A.P.P. opposes prayer for bail by submitting that the petitioner has got criminal antecedent. In the facts and circumstances as stated above, considering detention of the petitioner and further that charge sheet has already been submitted and there is no chance of tampering with the prosecution evidence and as such the petitioner is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of C.J.M. Munger in Kotwali P.S. Case No.
275 of 2015, subject to the conditions that one of the bailors must be a near relative and another having sufficient immovable property within the territorial jurisdiction of the court concerned and the petitioner shall remain present on each and every date during trial and the default on two consecutive dates on his part without any reason shall disentitle the petitioner from privilege of bail.