Rajendrasing Sardarsing Waghela v. The State Of Maharashtra
Mhi 1 BA-94-16.sxw
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 94 OF 2016 Rajendrasing Sardarsing Waghela ...
Applicant Vs.
The State of Maharashtra ...
Respondent Mr. Ganesh Bhujbal,Advocate for the applicant. Mr.R.M.Pethe,APP, for the State.
CORAM:
SMT.SADHANA S.JADHAV, J.
DATE : 24th January, 2017.
P.C.
Heard. This is an application under Section 439 of Cr.P.C. The applicant herein is arrested on 14.4.2015 in Crime No.122 of 2015 registered at Pydhonie Police Station on 14.4.2015. The investigation is completed and charge sheet is filed against the applicant for the offences punishable under Sections 370, 370A, 376, 363, 343, 344, 120B of the Indian Penal Code.
2.
It is the case of the prosecution that on 14.4.2015, Reshma Shaikh lodged a report at the police station alleging therein that her maternal cousin Ruksana had informed her that she has got a good job in the catering business at Ahmedabad. She was introduced to one Seema from Ahmedabad. The first informant and Ruksana had been to Ahmedabad. They were received by one person called Ramesh. They had
Mhi 2 BA-94-16.sxw gone to the house of Raju (present applicant). There they met Sunita Kamble aged about 15 years and one girl named Pooja. They had specifically asked the first informant as to whether she has come for the same job. Thereafter, 5 women and 10 - 12 men had come to see the first informant at the house of Raju. The applicant had taken Rs.1 lakh and had got her married to a person aged about 40 years old. The said persno had taken her to his house under coercion. The said person had sex with her. Sunita Kamble had also narrated the same experience. She had gone to Ahmedabad for catering work. They were taken to the house of Raju. The present applicant is indulging into immoral trafficking under false pretext of giving them job in catering industry. The minor girls are sold and they are made to believe that they have been married to the said person and are sent to the adjoining State.
3.
Taking into consideration the material collected by the investigating agency and the role attributed to the present applicant, this Court is of the opinion that the applicant does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. The application being sand merits, stands rejected. (SMT. SADHANA S.JADHAV, J.)