Safar Ali Sk@Shafar Ali Sk v. State Of West Bengal

09.12.2021.

27.

as (Rejected) C.R.M. 5095 of 2021 In Re:- An application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Domkul P.S. Case No.250 of dated 19.03.2017 under Sections 344/370/372/373 of the Indian penal Code and Sections 3/4/5/6/7(1A) of the Immoral traffic prevention Act. In the matter of : Safar Ali Sk @ Shafar Ali Sk.

...Petitioner.

Mr. Anisur Rahman.

...for the Petitioner.

Mr. Neguive Ahmed, ld. A.P.P., Ms. Trina Mitra.

...for the State.

Heard the learned Advocates appearing for the petitioner and the State.

Petitioner is in custody for more than four years. He submits he has been falsely implicated in the instant case. Learned Advocate appearing for the State opposes the prayer for bail and submits petitioner was running the brothel wherein minors were sexually exploited. We have considered the materials on record prima facie implicating the petitioner in trafficking minors for sexually exploitation. Allegations are very grave. Trial has already commenced. Vulnerable witnesses are yet to be examined. Under such circumstance and in view of the gravity of the offence, we are not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected.

However, in view of the protracted period of detention suffered by the petitioner, we direct the trial court to

expedite the trial and conclude the same at an early date preferably within one year from the next date fixed for recording evidence without granting unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties.

(Bivas Pattanayak, J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)