Smt. Rajkumari Premi v. State Of Chhattisgarh

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR MCRC No. 3681 of 2019 • Smt. Rajkumari Premi, Aged About 32 Years, W/o Late Shri Sitaram Premi, R/o Village- Bhatgaon, Police Station- Bhilaigarh, District : Balodabazar, Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Police Station- New Rajendra Nagar, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent MCRC No. 3716 of 2019 • Rajesh Mishra @ Vishvajeet Sen Gupta, S/o Shri Om Mishra @ Kanchan Sen Gupta, Aged About 38 Years R/o House No. 54, Sector1, Geetanjali Nagar, Shankar Nagar, Raipur, Tahsil and District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Applicant

Versus

• State Of Chhattisgarh Through Station House Officer, Police StationNew Rajendra Nagar, Raipur, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondent For Applicants :

Shri Ritesh Verma, Advocate for the respective applicants.

For Respondent :

Shri K.K. Singh, Dy. G.A. for State Hon'ble Smt. Justice Rajani Dubey Order on Board /06/2019 1.

As these two applications (MCRC No. 3681/2019 and MCRC No. 3716/2019) under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail to the applicants, who are in custody since 04.05.2019 in connection with 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 Trafic (Prevention) Act, 1956, are being disposed off by this common order.

2. As per the prosecution case, in brief, is that on 04.05.2019, the police of police Station New Rajendra Nagar, Raipur received an information that at Rajendra Nagar one Spa Center is being used as brothel and on the basis of said information, police led a trap and arrested the present applicants along with the other co-accused persons.

3. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. He would further submit that the other co-accused has already been granted bail by this Court. He further submits that charge sheet has not been filed and trial will likely to take some more time, therefore, they may be released on bail 4.

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State opposes the bail application.

5.

I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case diary.

6.

Considering the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegation levelled against the applicants, the fact that they are languishing in jail since 04.05.2019 and have no criminal antecedents, but without commenting anything on merits, I am inclined to release the applicants on regular bail.

7. Accordingly, the bail application is allowed and it is directed that the applicants shall be released on bail on their furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25,000/- to each with one

surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the concerned Court for their appearance before it as and when directed.

8. Certified copy as per rules.

Sd/- (Rajani Dubey) Judge yasmin