Akriti Joshi & ORS. v. State Of Chhattisgarh
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR M.Cr.C. No. 3519 of 2019
1. Akriti Joshi, W/o Shri Ashwini Joshi, aged about 25 years, R/o Satnaam Chowk, Devpuri, P.S. Tikrapara, Dist. Raipur (C.G.)
2. Bharti Jangde, W/o Shri Rajendra Jangde, aged about 30 years, Present R/o Phool Chowk, P.S. Moudhapara, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) Other address Satnaam Chowk, Devpuri, P.S. Tikrapara, Distt. Raipur (C.G.)
3. Aarti Ghritlahre, W/o Shri Shatrughan Ghritlahre, aged about 33 years, R/o Jorapara, Phool Chowk, P.S. Moudhapara, Distt. Raipur (C.G.) ---- Applicants/In Jail
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh, Through : Police Station New Rajendra Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) ----Non-applicant M.Cr.C. No. 3595 of 2019 Sheikh Ahmed, son of Late Sheikh Rahim, aged about 35 years (wrongly mentioned as 30 years in the impugned order), Resident of Village Kusumkasa, Police Station Dalli-rajahra, District Balod (C.G.) ---- Applicant /(In jail)
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh, Through the Police Station Rajendra Nagar, District Raipur (C.G.) ---- Non-applicant For Applicants : Mr. Pragallabh Sharma, Advocate in M.Cr.C. No. 3519/2019 For Applicant : Mr. Chakresh Tiwari, Advocate in M.Cr.C. No. 3595/2019. For Non-applicant : Mr. K.K. Singh, Govt. Advocate. Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order On Board 27/05/2019
(1) Above mentioned two bail applications filed under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. arise out of a common Crime No. 178 of 2019, registered at Police Station New Rajendra Nagar, District - Raipur (C.G.), for the offence punishable under Sections 4, 5 & 7 of The Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956, therefore, they are being heard analogously and decided by this Common Order. (2) Case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 04.05.2019, the police of police Station New Rajendra Nagar received an information that at Rajendra Nagar one Spa Centre is being used as brothel and has been managed by one namely Rajesh Mishra and on the basis of said information, police led a trap and arrested the present applicants along with other co-accused persons.
(3) Learned counsel appearing for the applicants would submit that the applicants have falsely been implicated in the crime in question as they have not committed any offence. He further submits applicants are languishing in jail since 5.5.2019 and the charge sheet is yet to be filed but substantial investigation has already been made and no useful purpose would be served in keeping them in jail and therefore, the may be released on bail.
(4) On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application. (5) Taking into consideration the nature and the gravity of the offences and considering the nature of allegation made against the applicants and the facts that applicants are languishing in jail since 5.5.2019 and charge sheet is yet to be filed but substantial investigation has already been made and particularly the fact that there is no criminal antecedents against the applicants; this court is of the view that it is a fit case to release the applicants on bail. Accordingly, the bail applications are allowed.
(6) Accused/applicants are directed to be released on bail on each of them executing a personal bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like sum to the satisfaction of the trial Court. They are directed to appear before the trial Court on each and every date given to them by the said Court. Certified copy, as per rules.
Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) Vacation Judge Amita/-