Ary Lalrin Yana @ Ralte Lalrinawmi v. The State Of Maharashtra

Vishal

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.497 OF 2016 Ms. Ralte Lalrinawmi ... Applicant vs.

The State of Maharashtra ... Respondent Mr. Rajendra Sorankar, for the Applicant.

Mrs. Rutuja Ambekar, APP for the State.

Mr. Dilip Patil (API), Chembur police station present.

CORAM:

MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.

DATE:

23rd MARCH, 2016 P.C.:

.

The application is moved for bail. The applicant/accused is facing charges for the offences punishable under Sections under Sections 370(3) read with 34 of Indian Penal Code and under Sections 3, 4 and 5 of Prevention of Immoral Traffic Act, 1956 at Spl. LAC No. 4 of 16 registered with Chembur police station, Mumbai. The offence is registered at the instance of Police Naik Mr. Ashok Khilari on 6th February, 2016.

2.

It is the case of the prosecution that on the basis of information received by them, on 6th February, 2016 police led a trap with the help of bogus customer at one Tantra Thai Spa, Chembur 1 / 3

where the prostitution business was going on. The applicant/accused Ralte was arrested at the time of trap. At that time, police came across women who were indulging into illegal activities under PITA. The applicant/accused is the assistant manager cum receptionist who collect money. The illegal activities under PITA were conducted under the pretext of Spa and massage center. There were six ladies found. Police recorded their statements and arrested the applicant/accused. Hence, this bail application.

3.

The learned counsel for the applicant/accused has submitted that no minor girl was found in the raid and all the ladies who are victims are major. The applicant/accused was working only as a receptionist and has no role in the offence. 4.

The learned prosecutor oppose the bail application and submitted that the illegal activities were conducted under the garb of running massage center in the said Spa. She submitted that applicant/accused is Indian citizen however the victim girls were of citizens of Thailand.

2 / 3

5.

Perused the first information report, statements of the victim girls and other documents. All the victim girls are major. There is no complaint from the girls that there was force to do prostitution business. Under such circumstances, I pass the following order: a) The bail application is allowed.

b) The applicant/accused be enlarged on bail upon furnishing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs. 15,000/- with one or two solvent sureties in the like amount.

c) She shall not tamper with the evidence and shall not pressurize the witnesses.

d) She shall not indulge into any criminal activity, while on bail.

e) She shall attend the concerned police station on every Saturday in the morning between 10.00 am to 11.00 am till filing of the charge-sheet.

f) Violation of any of the conditions imposed shall amount to cancellation of bail forthwith.

6.

Bail application stands disposed of on above terms. (MRS.MRIDULA BHATKAR, J.) 3 / 3