Allowed

Momin Asadulla Akhtar v. the State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC17 Aug 2021BA/1324/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court granted bail to the applicant, accused of trafficking under PITA and POCSO acts, upon furnishing a surety bond and agreeing to report periodically. The order was predicated on the absence of antecedents and the overage of investigation.

What did the court decide?

Released on personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with sureties in like sum; must report to police station periodically; to furnish address; not to tamper with evidence.

Momin Asadulla Akhtar Vs the State of Maharashtra — Child Sexual Offences (POCSO) | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

1/4

¶2

BA-1324-2021 (sr.22)
17.8.2021

¶3

Rane

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶5

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶6

 BAIL APPLICATION NO.1324 OF 2021

¶7

Momin Asadulla Akhtar .....Applicant/
 Accused

¶8

V/s.

¶9

The State of Maharashtra
(at the instance of Colaba Police
Station vide C.R. No.208 of 2019) ....Respondent

¶10

* * * *

¶11

Mr. Prabhanjay R. Dave, Advocate for the applicant.

¶12

Mrs.Anamika Mahotra, APP for State.

¶13

API, Sudhakar Shitap from Colaba Police Station present.

¶14

CORAM : SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J.

¶15

Tuesday, 17th August, 2021.

¶16

P.C. :

¶17

1. Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and
learned APP for State.

¶18

2. Applicant seeks his enlargement on bail in Crime
No.208/2019 registered with Colaba Police Station for the
offences punishable under Sections 370, 370(A), 366(A) and

¶19

2/4

¶20

BA-1324-2021 (sr.22)
17.8.2021

¶21

Rane

¶22

Section 376 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code
and Sections 3, 4, 5 and 7(1)(b) of the Immoral Traffic
(Prevention) Act, 1956 (“PITA Act” for short) and
Sections 4, 8, 12 and 17 of Protection of Children from
Sexual Offences Act (“POCSO Act” for short).

¶23

3. On 21st December, 2019 establishment of hotel
“Blue Light” was raided and the victims who were
subjected to sexual exploitation within the meaning of
Explanation-I appended to Section 370 of the Indian Penal
Code, were rescued. Except one, all were major. The
statement of minor victim shows that, she was brought into
the establishment by one lady named, Rekha, whereafter
crime in question was registered against the Manager and
the applicant. Applicant was working as a Manager in the
said Establishment. Except his presence on the
establishment when the raid was conducted, prima-facie,
the chargesheet does not suggest his role in trafficking of
victims for their sexual exploitation. That even otherwise,
the investigation is over and the chargesheet has been filed.

¶24

4. Mr. Dave, learned Counsel for the applicant
submits that, Manager of the Establishment has been
granted bail by this Court in Bail Application

¶25

3/4

¶26

BA-1324-2021 (sr.22)
17.8.2021

¶27

Rane

¶28

No.205/2021. In consideration of the facts of the case and
in the absence of criminal antecedents, the applicant is
directed to be released on bail and hence the following order
:

¶29

O R D E R

¶30

(i) The applicant arrested in Crime No. 208/2019
registered at Colaba Police Station, shall be released
on bail on executing P.R. bond for the sum of
Rs.25,000/- (Rs. Twenty Five Thousand only) with
one or more sureties in the like sum.

¶31

(ii) The applicant shall report concerned Police
Station once in a month on first Saturday of the
month between 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. for a period
of six months and thereafter once in three months
on first Saturday of the month between 11:00 a.m.
to 1:00 p.m. till further orders.

¶32

(iii) The applicant shall furnish the details of his
present and permanent residential address to the
Investigating Officer within seven days of his release
from jail.

¶33

4/4 BA-1324-2021 (sr.22)
17.8.2021

¶34

Rane

¶35

(iv) The applicant shall not tamper with the
evidence or attempt to influence or contact the
complainant, witnesses or any person concerned
with the case.

¶36

5. The application is accordingly allowed and disposed off.

¶37

6. It is made clear that, observations made
hereinabove, shall be construed as expression of opinion for
the purpose of granting bail only and the same shall not, in
any way, influence the trial in other proceedings.

¶38

Digitally signed by NEETA NEETA SHAILESH SHAILESH SAWANT SAWANT Date: 2021.08.18 11:03:59 +0530

¶39

(SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J.)

Momin Asadulla Akhtar v. the State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Momin Asadulla Akhtar 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

Pravin Baban Dinkar Vs the State of Maharashtra

Chandrakant Gopal Bhai Patel Vs the State of Maharashtra

Sandeep Kaluram Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra

Vikas Vinod Sharma Vs the State of Maharashtra

Rahim Rehmat Khan Vs the State of Maharashtra

Mohammad Amir Kamaruddin Ansari @ Gola Vs the State of Maharashtra