Allowed

Aniket Arvind Wagh v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC4 Apr 2019ABA/152/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court considered an anticipatory bail application by the owner of a lodge where females were rescued. After examining police statements, the court found the applicant's involvement limited to ownership. It granted bail subject to marking presence at the police station monthly.

What did the court decide?

Granted bail on PR Bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety, conditional on marking presence at the police station once every three months.

Aniket Arvind Wagh Vs the State of Maharashtra — Anticipatory Bail | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

ppn 1 915.aba -152.19.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION NO.152 OF 2019

¶4

Aniket Arvind Wagh Vs.	.. Applicant
State of Maharashtra	.. Respondent

¶5

Mr.A.P. Mundargi, Senior Advocate a/w Mr.Mohitrao Jadhav I/by Mr.Subir Sarkar for the applicant. Mr.A.R.Kapadnis, APP for respondent-State. Mr.S.S. Londhe, PSI, Indapur Police Station, Pune Gramin.

¶6

CORAM : P.N. DESHMUKH, J. DATE : 4^th April 2019

¶7

P.C.:

¶8

. Heard learned counsel for applicant and learned APP.

¶9

Perused copy of charge-sheet filed with application.

¶10

Learned counsel for applicant submitted that based on

¶11

information received by police, Rupali Lodge, owned by applicant which is managed by one Ajay Shinde came to be raided by police where from two major females came to be rescued, however by referring to their statements recorded by police and subsequently by women cell has demonstrated as to no involvement of applicant can be established in the present crime and has therefore, sought anticipatory bail.

¶12

ppn 2 915.aba -152.19.doc

¶13

Learned APP opposed application on the ground that applicant's involvement is established from statements of rescued females having referred him as owner of the Lodge which aspect has not been disputed by applicant. However, it is specific case that Lodge is managed by Manager Ajay Shinde who admittedly is released on bail.

¶14

In the light of involvement of applicant and case of applicant as aforesaid, perusal of statements of both rescued females who are admittedly major reveals that applicant was introduced to them as owner of Rupali Lodge by Ajay Shinde, who according to their statements, had introduced them into prostitution business in same Lodge who is admittedly released on bail. From statements, it is thus found that applicant's only involvement is that he is owner of Rupali Lodge and nothing more.

¶15

Perusal of statement of both these females recorded by women cell on following day, however, reveals that they occasionally due to financial constrained were forced to indulge in prostitution. In fact according to one such female on the day on which raid is carried out, she had not indulged into any such act but was present in Lodge as she had been there to collect her Aadhar card. Perusal of this statement

¶16

ppn 3 915.aba -152.19.doc

¶17

would reveal that there is overwriting made therein stating that she was

¶18

charging Rs.1,000/- for prostitution which prima facie appears to be subsequently added in her statement, however, without going to this aspect at this stage, as applicant's involvement is nothing more than owner of Lodge, following order is passed : -

¶19

ORDER

¶20

(i) In the event of arrest of applicant in C.R. No.250 of 2018 registered with Indapur Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1959, he shall be released on bail on his executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.25,000/- with one surety in the like amount;

¶21

(ii) While on bail, applicant shall mark his presence with Indapur Police Station once in three months on the first day of each month pending trial;

¶22

(iii) Application is disposed of in above terms.

¶23

P.N. DESHMUKH, J.

Aniket Arvind Wagh v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aniket Arvind Wagh v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Gaurav Dipak Sonavane Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Mukta Tukaram Gaikwad Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Shrikant Bapurao Shirke Vs the State of Maharashtra

Suraj Chandrakant Tiwale Vs the State of Maharashtra

Machindra Shankar Tingare Vs the State of Maharashtra

Venkatesh Suresh Hullur Vs the State of Maharashtra