Smt. Tarana Sairam Kesiya v. The State Of Maharashtra, Through P.S. Lakadganj, Nagpur

ABA446.15

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (ABA) NO.446 OF 2015 Smt. Tarana Sairam Kesiya ..vs..

State of Mah., thr Police Station, Lakadganj, Nagpur Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders Shri A.B. Moon, counsel for the applicant.

Shri T.H. Udeshi, APP for the State.

CORAM : V.M. DESHPANDE, J.

DATE : SEPTEMBER 21, 2015.

Heard.

By this present application, the applicant is seeking the relief of pre-arrest bail, since the applicant is apprehending her arrest in connection Crime No.280 of 2015, registered with Police Station Lakadganj, Nagpur, for the offences punishable under Sections 344, 366(A), 372, 373 of the Indian Penal Code read with 3, 4, 5, 6, and, 7 of the Immoral Traffic (prevention) Act, 1956.

On 10.7.2015, one Shri Abraham Hegde, Member of Freedom Firm, lodged a report with Lakadgang Police Station, Nagpur informing that some of the minor girls are brought to the Red Light Area and they are forced to do the flesh trade. Upon getting such information, when the raid was effected by the police authorities, two minor girls viz. Nitu .....2/-

ABA446.15 Jaisingh Dhanawat and Pallavi Shriram Kesiya were rescued from the area. At that time, the police authorities found that the present applicant and one Fula Dhanawat were doing the business of prostitution in the premises of one Munnibai. The present applicant ran away from the spot.

According to learned counsel for the applicant, in the proceeding of handing over of the custody of the minor girls, learned CJM, Nagpur recorded the finding that prima facie the girls are not minor and, therefore, custody was handed over over to their mother.

The statement of Pallavi and Nitu are recorded. From their statement it reveals that Pallavi is the younger sister of the present applicant. It also reveals that they are forced doing the business of prostitution and pushed in the flesh trade.

In that view of the matter, since I find that this is not the case in which the discretion should be exercised, the application for grant of anticipatory bail is rejected.

JUDGE !! BRW !!

...../-