Allowed

Kumar Balbahadur Pradhan and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC16 Apr 2019BA/164/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bail application filed by accused in C.R. No.358 of 2018 for offences under IPC and PITA Act. Single bench allowed bail noting lack of evidence establishing applicants' involvement in the crime.

What did the court decide?

Applicants released on bail on executing surety bonds in Rs.15,000 with one surety each each and marking presence once in 3 months pending trial.

Kumar Balbahadur Pradhan and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra — Bail and Remand | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

ppn 1 12.ba-164.19.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

BAIL APPLICATION NO.164 OF 2019

¶4

Kumar Balbahadur Pradhan & Ors. .. Applicants Vs. State of Maharashtra .. Respondent

¶5

Mr.Sachin H. Deokar for the applicants. Smt.A.A. Takalkar, APP for respondent-State. Mr. Rohit Rajendra Divare, PSI, Hinawadi Police Station, Pune.

¶6

CORAM : P.N. DESHMUKH, J. DATE : 16^th April 2019

¶7

P.C.:

¶8

. Heard learned counsel for applicants and learned APP for respondent-State. Perused copy of charge-sheet filed with application.

¶9

Applicants involved in C.R. No.358 of 2018 registered with Hinjewadi Police Station, District Pune have filed this application for bail. Learned counsel for applicants on the basis of documents filed with application submitted that all applicants were working in house as employed on salary and are in no way concerned with present crime as no role is attributed to them establishing their involvement in the same. It is further contended that all females are major and as per their statements, they are indulged in prostitution willingly who are now rescued and therefore prays that application be allowed.

¶10

ppn 2 12.ba-164.19.doc

¶11

Perusal of report would reveal that based on information received by police, raid came to be carried out in building situated at Hinjawadi, Pune on 17^th July 2018 in presence of independent witnesses and using dummy customers where 7 females were found indulged in prostitution. Though name of applicant no.1 Kumar B. Pradhan is mentioned in report, as a person to be instrumental with one Sunny to have brought the rescued females for indulging into prostitution, from statement of these girls, neither involvement of any of applicants nor of applicant no.1 Kumar B. Pradhan is established. As such, except for bare involvement of applicant no.1 Kumar B. Pradhan in report, there is no other evidence to substantiate contents of report.

¶12

Perusal of statements of all 7 females, who are admittedly major, none of them would reveal that they were forcibly made to indulge in prostitution business. Having considering the facts as aforesaid and as there is nothing to establish involvement of applicants in present crime and as charge-sheet is filed, application is liable to be allowed as per order below :-

¶13

ORDER

¶14

(i) Applicants in C.R. No.358 of 2018 registered with Hinjewadi Police Station, District Pune for the offences punishable under Sections

¶15

ppn 3 12.ba-164.19.doc

¶16

370, 370(4) and 34 of IPC and under Sections 3, 4 and 5 of PITA Act shall be released on bail on their executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs.15,000/- each with one surety each in the like amount;

¶17

(ii) While on bail, applicants shall mark their presence with Hinjewadi Police Station, District Pune once in 3 months on the first day of each month between 10.00 a.m. to 1.00 noon pending trial;

¶18

(iii) Application stands disposed of as allowed in above terms.

¶19

P.N. DESHMUKH, J.

Kumar Balbahadur Pradhan and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kumar Balbahadur Pradhan and Ors. 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

Mehboob Alam Samidulla Maniyar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sunil Bhauso Kamble Vs the State of Maharashtra

Arif Gulab Attar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Yogesh Pralhad Adsul Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mahesh Mohan Mane Vs the State of Maharashtra

Pavitra Subhash Mane Vs the State of Maharashtra