Allowed

Kiran S/O Dayalu Ukey v. the State of Maharashtra Thr Pso., Ps Nagpur

Bombay HC8 Jan 2026BA/1418/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail application, Nagpur Bench of Bombay High Court (M.M. Nerlikar, J., 08/01/2026), Criminal Application (BA) No.1418 of 2025; offences under Sections 3, 4, 5, 7 PITA and Sections 143(2), 143(3) BNS 2023; Exotic Spa and Saloon raid; receptionist/employee role; owner Pratima Badge; dummy customer Rs.3500/-; major victim; no commission from prostitution business; arrest 25.11.2025; bail on

What did the court decide?

Applicant released on bail on furnishing P.R. bond of Rs.25,000/- with one to two solvent sureties in the like amount, subject to conditions: attendance at the concerned police station as and when cal

Kiran S/O Dayalu Ukey Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Pso., Ps Nagpur — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

¶1

1 33.ba.1418.2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

¶3

CRIMINAL APPLICATION (BA) NO.1418 OF 2025

¶4

Kiran s/o Dayalu Ukey ..vs..

¶5

State of Maharashtra

¶6

- - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders

¶7

¶8

Shri N.P. Jagre, Advocate for the applicant. Shri A.A. Madiwale, APP for the State.

¶9

CORAM: M.M. NERLIKAR, J. DATE : 08/01/2026.

¶10

Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State.

¶11

By way of present application the applicant is seeking bail in connection with Crime No.614/2025 dated 25.11.2025 for the offence punishable under Sections 3, 4, 5, 7 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 (‘PITA’) read with Sections 143(2), 143(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 registered with the Ajani Police Station, Nagpur City.

¶12

The allegations in the FIR are that the accused is carrying prostitution and trafficking business at the Exotic spa and saloon and accordingly a raid was conducted where the applicant was found.

¶13

It is alleged that the present applicant is the Receptionist at the Exotic Spa and Saloon (SPA) and she has taken Rs.3500/- from the dummy customer and accordingly, she has provided a girl to the dummy

¶14

2 33.ba.1418.2025

¶15

customer. The learned Counsel for the applicant submits that from the FIR it appears that the main allegations are against the owner of the SPA namely Pratima Badge. He submits that, the present applicant was not found on the spot, however, she was brought from the roof of the apartment, where the SPA was situated. He submits that she has no concern with the said SPA and she was only doing her job as an employee. Even the victim who was found was major. He further submits that the applicant was arrested on 25.11.2025 and since then she is behind the bar.

¶16

On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has invited my attention to the allegations made in the FIR. He further pointed out the statement of the victim, who revealed the name of the present applicant and how the victim was victimized, and therefore, it was prayed that the present applicant does not deserve bail considering the seriousness of the offence.

¶17

Upon hearing the learned Counsel for the applicant as well as the learned APP for the State, and after considering the facts and circumstances surfaces on record, it appears that the offence was registered under the provisions of the PITA and so also under the provisions of the BNS, 2023. It is not in dispute that the applicant is an employee and said SPA is run by Pratima Badge. Further the victim was a major woman. Also it has not come on record that the applicant is carrying the alleged business of prostitution and from that business she is getting some commission, however it appears that

¶18

3 33.ba.1418.2025

¶19

she is working as receptionist on meagre amount. Therefore, considering the above facts, I am inclined to grant bail.

¶20

The observations are prima facie in nature and the Trial Court shall not be influenced by observations of this Court which are restricted to the present bail application only.

¶21

8. Hence the following order :

¶22

(a) The application is allowed.

¶23

(b) The applicant/accused Kiran s/o Dayalu Ukey in connection with the Crime No.614/2025 dated 25.11.2025 for the offence punishable under Sections 3, 4, 5, 7 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 read with Sections 143(2), 143(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 registered with the Ajani Police Station, Nagpur City be released on bail on furnishing P.R. bond of Rs.25,000/- with one to two solvent sureties in the like amount.

¶24

¶25

(d) The applicant/accused shall co-operate with the Investigating Agency.

¶26

(e) The applicant/accused shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or

¶27

4 33.ba.1418.2025

¶28

promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case, as also shall not tamper with the evidence.

¶29

(f) The applicant shall not engage in any similar type of offence again.

¶30

(g) Breach of either of condition would give rise to the prosecution to move before this Court for cancellation of bail.

¶31

The application stands disposed of accordingly.

¶32

(M.M. NERLIKAR, J.)

¶33

Trupti

¶34

Signed by: Trupti D. Agrawal Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 08/01/2026 19:53:27

Kiran S/O Dayalu Ukey v. the State of Maharashtra Thr Pso., Ps Nagpur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kiran S/O Dayalu Ukey v. the State of Maharashtra Thr Pso., Ps Nagpur

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