Sagar Maruti Savratkar v. State Of Maharashtra

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 461 OF 2025 Sagar Maruti Savratkar .... Applicant

Versus

The State of Maharashtra .... Respondents ----- Mr. Veerdhawal Deshmukh, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. S. S. Chaudhari, A.P.P., for the Respondent - State. P.S.I. Mr. H. S. Naik Gadhinglaj Police Station - Present. ----- CORAM : SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.

Digitally signed by SHANTANU SHANKARSA DHUDUM Date:

2025.09.22 18:16:14 +0530 SHANTANU SHANKARSA DHUDUM DATE : 19th SEPTEMBER, 2025.

P.C. :

1.

Heard learned counsel for the Applicant and learned APP for the Respondent - State.

2.

By this application, the Applicant is seeking regular bail in connection with C.R. No.466 of 2024 registered with Gadhinglaj Police Station, Kolhapur, for the offence punishable under Sections 143(3), 3(15) of th Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (for short "BNS Act") and Sections 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 (for short, "ITPA").

3.

It is prosecution's case that the Applicant was the manager Shantanu S. Dhudum 1/4

of a lodge at Gadhinglaj and he compelled the victim to engage in prostitution.

3.

It is contention of learned counsel for the Applicant that the Applicant is behind bars for more than one year. Though charge is framed, there is no progress in the trial. It may take time to conclude the trial. The Applicant has no antecedents. Hence, requested to allow the application.

4.

It is contention of learned APP that the allegations of human trafficking is alleged against the Applicant. He is the main culprit. The statement of victim shows that she was acquainted with the Applicant. The Applicant called her at the lodge and induced her into prostitution. If the Applicant is released on bail, he may abscond and threaten the prosecution witnesses, and requested to reject the application.

5.

I have heard both learned counsel, perused F.I.R. and documents produced on record.

6.

Investigation is completed and charge-sheet has been filed against the Applicant. Though charge is framed, there is no progress in the trial. The Applicant is behind bars for more than one year. It may take time conclude the trial. Considering these facts, I pass Shantanu S. Dhudum 2/4

following order:

ORDER

i. The Application is allowed.

ii. The Applicant be enlarged on bail in connection with C.R. No.466 of 2024 registered with Gadhinglaj Police Station, Kolhapur, on furnishing P.R. Bond Rs.50,000/- with one or two sureties in the like amount.

iii. The Applicant shall mark his attendance with the concerned police station as and when required. iv. The Applicant shall remain present before the trial Court on each date unless exempted by the trial Court.

v. The Applicant shall not tamper with the evidence or attempt to influence or contact the complainant, witness or any person concerned with the case. vi. The Applicant shall inform his latest place of residence and mobile number immediately after being released and/or change of residence or mobile details, if any, from time to time to the Investigating Shantanu S. Dhudum 3/4

Officer.

vii. The Trial Court shall not be influenced by the observations made in this order and shall decide the matter on its own merits and in accordance with law.

7.

The application is allowed in the aforesaid terms and is accordingly disposed off.

8.

All the concerned to act on the authenticated copy of this order.

( SHIVKUMAR DIGE, J.) Shantanu S. Dhudum 4/4