Soma @ Soma Maity @ Nandarani Maity v. The State Of West Bengal And ANR.
30.01.2024.
19.
Ct.No.28 as (Rejected) C.R.M. (DB) 4746 of 2023 In Re:- An application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with Ramnagar P.S. Case No.24 of 2022 dated 15.02.2022 under Sections 363/366 of the Indian Penal Code and charge sheet submitted under Sections 363/365/366A/368/370/ 372/376D/376(2)(n)/120B of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/5/6/7/9 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act and Section 14 of the Foroeigners Act and Section 6 of the POCSO Act.
In the matter of : Soma @ Soma Maity @ Nandarani Maity.
... Petitioner.
Mr. Suman De, Mr. Mrityunjoy Chatterjee, Mr. Abhinaba Mukherjee.
...for the Petitioner.
Mr. Neguive Ahmed, ld. A.P.P., Mr. Asif Dewan.
...for the State.
1.
Petitioner is in custody for more than two years. He submits vulnerable witnesses have been examined. Accordingly, he prays for bail.
2.
Learned Advocate for the State opposes the bail prayer. He contends victims have implicated the petitioner in an offence of transnational trafficking of women for sexual exploitation. Trial has substantially progressed and would be concluded shortly.
3.
We have considered the materials on record.
Vulnerable witnesses have implicated the petitioner in the offence of trafficking of women for sexual exploitation. Trial has substantially progressed and as per report submitted before us, only three witnesses are yet to be
examined. It is expected the prosecution shall examinee the said witnesses at the earliest.
4.
Hence, we are not inclined to grant bail to petitioner.
5.
Accordingly, the prayer for bail of petitioner is rejected.
6.
We request the trial court to conclude the trial with utmost expedition preferably within six months from the next date fixed for recording evidence without granting unnecessary adjournment to either of the parties. 7.
Parties shall communicate this order to the trial court for due compliance.
(Gaurang Kanth, J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)