Meeta Nimay Mandal v. The State Of Maharashtra

1/3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION BAIL APPLICATION NO.2243 OF 2017 Meeta Nimay Mandal ....

Applicant Vs.

The State of Maharashtra ....

Respondent Mr. Satyavrut Joshi for the Applicant.

Mr. S.R. Agarkar, APP for the State.

Mr. G.S. Shinde, PSI, Faraskhana Police Station, Pune Coram : Smt. Sadhana S. Jadhav, J.

Date : 15th January, 2018 P.C.:

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned APP.

This is an application under Section 439 Code of Criminal Procedure. The applicant herein is arrested on 13th January, 2017 in Crime No.11 of 2017, registered at Faraskhana Police Station, Pune for the offences punishable under Sections 370, 344, 323, 504 read with 34 Indian Penal Code and Sections 3,4,5, 6 and 7 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956. The investigation is completed and the charge-sheet is filed.

2/3 It is the case of the prosecution that the applicant herein was conducting a brothel at Budhwar Peth, Pune. On 13th January 2017, on the basis of secret information that minor girls were made to indulge into prostitution. Faraskhana Police had conducted raid on the said brothel and had rescued three girls. The statements of the victims were recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. One of the victim, Ms. "X" who was hardly 17 years old has contended in her statement that in Dhaka she was working as domestic maid alongwith another girl. That at the instance of the other girls, she had gone to Kolkata. The victim was introduced to a person called Hafiz. Hafiz had brought the victim to Pune. Hafiz had taken her to Budhwar Peth area and had given her custody to the present applicant. She was informed by the present applicant that Hafiz had sold her for Rs.60,000/- and that she was brought to the said place for the purpose of prostitution.

The application filed by co-accused is also rejected earlier. There is sufficient material to indicate that the applicant was not only the conductor of brothel but also misled minor girls and was also indulging into trafficking. It is in these circumstances, the applicant does not deserve to be enlarged on bail. The application being sans-merits stands rejected.

3/3 The observations made hereinabove are prima facie in nature and are restricted to the application under Section 439 Code of Criminal Procedure and the trial Court shall not be influenced by the same.

( Smt. Sadhana S. Jadhav, J)