Disposed

Shiba Prasad Ghadai v. State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC17 Oct 2024ABA/2853/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Anticipatory bail application by a hotel owner accused of running prostitution activities on his premises. Court noted applicant absent during raid, adult victims did not implicate him, co-accused already bailed, charge sheet filed. Granted anticipatory bail with conditions against tampering and witness influence.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail: release on PR Bond of Rs.25,000/- with one or more sureties if arrested, subject to conditions of no tampering/influencing and court attendance.

Shiba Prasad Ghadai vs State of Maharashtra — Narcotics (NDPS) | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

Digitally signed by CHITRA CHITRA SANJAYSONAWANE Chitra Sonawane. SANJAYSONAWANE Date:2024.10.2201:41:48 27-aba-2853-2024.docx +0530

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

Anticipatory Bail Application No. 2853 of 2024

¶4

Shiba Prasad Ghadai Age 49, Occ.: Business, R/o. Kusunnagar, Chadheya, Barapada, Bhadrak, Odisha – 756 113.

¶5

… Applicant

¶6

versus

¶7

The State of Maharashtra Through Central Police Station, Ulhasnagar – 3, Dist.: Thane.

¶8

Mr Mainak Adhikary i/b Mr Pintu Singh, for the applicant. Mr Arfan Sait, APP, for the respondent/ State.

¶9

Coram: R.N. Laddha, J. Date: 21 October 2024.

¶10

P.C.:

¶11

By this application, the applicant seeks pre-arrest bail in connection with CR No.743 of 2024, registered at Central Police Station, Thane City, for offences punishable under Sections 3, 4, 5 and 7 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 and Sections 370(2) read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

¶12

It is the case of the prosecution that on 7 May 2024, the

¶13

Page 1 of 4 __________________________________________________ 21 October 2024

¶14

27-aba-2853-2024.docx

¶15

Chitra Sonawane.

¶16

police received confidential information about ongoing prostitution activities in ‘Blue Berry Lodging and Boarding’ at Ulhasnagar. Acting on the tip, the police laid a trap with the help of a decoy customer and witnesses at Hotel. During the raid, the police rescued eight girls. Further investigation revealed the applicant’s name as the owner of the hotel and the principle perpetrator of the crime.

¶17

Mr Mainak Adhikary, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant, asserts the applicant’s innocence and contends that the applicant has been falsely implicated in the crime. Although the applicant is the owner of the hotel, he is a resident of Orissa and doesn’t frequently attend the business and entrusted the operations to accused No.2. There is nothing on record linking the applicant to the alleged crime, nor is there any material to substantiate the allegations. Additionally, there is no indication that the applicant was involved in bringing the victims for prostitution. The applicant was not present at the scene during the alleged raid. The co-accused have already been released on bail. The victims, who are of legal age, have not implicated or made any allegations against the applicant. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. Mr Adhikary further submits that the investigation is complete, and a charge sheet has been filed. There is nothing to be recovered

¶18

Page 2 of 4

¶19

21 October 2024

¶20

27-aba-2853-2024.docx

¶21

Chitra Sonawane.

¶22

from the applicant. There is no risk of the applicant fleeing or tampering with the witnesses, and he will not misuse his liberty if granted bail.

¶23

Mr Arfan Sait, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the respondent/ State, opposes the prayer for prearrest bail and contends that the applicant is the licensee of the premises, and as such is the beneficiary of the prostitution business. The applicant played a significant role in the criminal activities that resulted in the filing of the FIR. The learned APP raises concern about granting pre-arrest bail as the applicant may tamper with the evidence or influence witnesses.

¶24

This Court has given anxious consideration to the rival submissions canvassed across the Bar and perused the material on record. It is not in dispute that the applicant was not present at the scene during the raid. All the victims involved are adults, and none have implicated the applicant in the present crime. There are no allegations of sexual assault against the applicant. The co-accused, who are arraigned as the main accused in the crime, has already been granted bail. The investigation has concluded, and a charge sheet has been filed. Nothing remains to be recovered from the applicant. The applicant has no criminal antecedents. The apprehension of the prosecution

¶25

Page 3 of 4

¶26

21 October 2024

¶27

Chitra Sonawane. 27-aba-2853-2024.docx

¶28

about evidence tampering and witness influence can be addressed by imposing appropriate conditions. In these circumstances, this Court is inclined to grant pre-arrest bail to the applicant. Hence, the following order:

¶29

ORDER

¶30

(i) In the event of the applicant’s arrest in connection with CR No.743 of 2024, registered at Central Police Station, Thane City, he shall be released on bail upon executing a PR Bond of Rs.25,000/- and furnishing one or more sureties in the like amount.

¶31

(ii) The applicant, himself or through any other person, shall not tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses.

¶32

(iii) The applicant shall regularly attend the jurisdictional Court and cooperate for the expeditious disposal of the case.

¶33

The application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶34

Page 4 of 4

¶35

21 October 2024

Shiba Prasad Ghadai v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shiba Prasad Ghadai v. 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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Rohit Arun Mane vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bina Jayantilal Ruparelia vs State of Maharashtra

Mahesh Sahebrao Yeole vs State of Maharashtra

Durgappa @ Rajabhau Narsu Waghmode vs the State of Maharashtra

Seema Purushotam Dhuri vs State of Maharashtra

Bapu Namdev Bhadvankar vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.