Pravin Shivram Pujary v. The State Of Maharashtra

1 of 2 925.BA.710.2018.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO.710 OF 2018 Pravin Shivram Pujary, Age 32 years, R/o.Room No.A-401, Building No.6, Krishnasthal, Miragaon, Dist.Thane.

Applicant versus The State of Maharashtra Respondent Mr.Niranjan S. Mundargi I/by Veerdhawal Deshmukh for applicant. Mr.Prashant Jadhav, APP, for State.

Mr.Jagdish M. Bangar, PSI, Kashimira Police Station, present. CORAM :

PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.

DATE : 24th January 2019 PC :

1.

This is an application for bail in CR No.120 of 2017 registered with Kashimira Police Station for offences under sections 366(A), 372 r/w 34 of Indian Penal Code, under Sections 3,4,5 of Immoral Traffic Prevention Act and Section 18 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act.

2.

The case of prosecution is that information was received with regards to prostitution racket being run at Poonam Ameesha Co-op. Housing Society. Upon receipt of information the complainant informed the same to Police Inspector, who decided to approach office of Anti Human Trafficking Cell. On reaching the said office, the investigating officer arranged for panchas and decided to raid the said place. The person who intimated police about the alleged offence, acted as dummy customer. He contacted the applicant and

2 of 2 925.BA.710.2018.doc co-accused Ruby and demanded requirement of young girl to have physical relation. The dummy customer was informed that it would cost huge amount. The dummy customer was also informed that the girl would be provided at the house of accused. Panchanama was drawn. It is also alleged that the applicant had forwarded photograph of the young girl. Subsequently the applicant and other accused were apprehended at the house. The advocate for applicant submits that there is nothing on record to show that applicant had informed that the victim was minor. The applicant is in custody from the date of arrest. Investigation is completed and charge sheet is filed.

3.

Learned APP submitted that the offence is of serious nature. The circumstances show that the applicant had knowledge that the victim was minor. The age of victim was 14 years. On perusal of the FIR and other documents it is apparent that the victim who is aged about 16 years, was sister of accused no.2 and daughter of accused no.3. A specific role has been attributed to the applicant. The sister of the victim with the help of applicant had fixed the price of the victim for prostitution by providing virgin girl. The statements recorded during the course of investigation shows complicity of the applicant in the crime. In the circumstances, no case for grant of bail is made out. Accordingly, bail application is rejected. (PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.) MST