Madhya Pradesh High Court
Taniya vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 6 August, 2024
Author: Prakash Chandra Gupta
Bench: Prakash Chandra Gupta
1 MCRC-31635-2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA
ON THE 6 th OF AUGUST, 2024
MISC. CRIMINAL CASE No. 31635 of 2024
TANIYA AND OTHERS
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH
Appearance:
Shri Trilok Chand Jain, learned counsel for the applicant.
Shri Rahul Solanki, learned G.A. for the State.
ORDER
Heard with the aid of case diary.
This is repeat second bail application filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (in short "B.N.S.S."), for grant of bail to the applicants, relating to FIR/Crime No.308/2024 dated (not mentioned) registered at Police Station- Pithampur Sector-1, District- Dhar (M.P.) for commission of offence punishable under Sections 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act.
2. First bail application of the applicants were dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 01.07.2024 passed in M.Cr.C. No.23999/2024.
3. Prosecution story, in brief is that on 17/05/2024, after receiving secret information, a police team was constituted headed by A.S.I., K.K. Parihar, Sector 1, Pithampur, Distt.- Dhar. The team proceeded towards Yuvaraj Dhaba situated at village Dhundhiya P.S. Pithampur. A team Signature Not Verified Signed by: AJIT KAMALASANAN Signing time: 07-08-2024 18:15:25 2 MCRC-31635-2024 member was sent in Dhaba after giving 2 currency notes worth of Rs.500/- each. Remaining members of the team stood around taking their positions. A woman took the money from the team member and thereafter the police personnel gave signal upon which all the police team got inside. On being questioned, applicant no.1 told her name to be Tanya. She also told that the Dhaba is managed by co-accused Pradeep Kaushal. Upon his direction, she calls females for the purpose of prostitution. She charges males Rs.1,000/- for the same purpose. During the search applicant no. 2 and 3 Meghna and Deepa and co-accused Jeevan were found in objectionable state. On being interrogated, they told that the manager of the Dhaba is co-accused Pradeep Kaushal and he has called them for the purpose of prostitution. A sum of Rs.1,000/- were seized (the aforementioned currency notes) from co-accused Tanya. Apart from that Rs.3,000/- were also recovered from co-accused Tanya. From co-accused Jeevan Rs.50/- and 3 condoms, from the purse of applicants Megha and Deepa 2-2 condoms and other materials were also recovered and seized. An FIR was lodged. During investigation, it was revealed that the present applicant and other co-accused persons are also involved in the crime.
4. Learned counsel for the applicants/ accused persons submits that, the applicants have not committed the offence and they have falsely been implicated in the case. It is further submitted that as alleged no offence u/S 3, 6 and 7 of Immoral Trafficking (Prevention) Act, 1956 is made out but only section 4 and 5 of the Act is made out against the applicants, which is punishable with imprisonment upto 5 years. It is also submitted that the Signature Not Verified Signed by: AJIT KAMALASANAN Signing time: 07-08-2024 18:15:25 3 MCRC-31635-2024 applicants are in custody since 17/05/2024. After dismissal of first bail application of the applicants as withdrawn, chargesheet has been filed. Trial will take considerable long time for its disposal, therefore, it is prayed that the applicants be released on bail.
5. On other hand learned counsel for the non-applicant/ State has opposed the prayer and submits that the applicant Tanya has a criminal antecedent of a likewise offence. The applicants are resident of other states therefore, possibility that they will abscond cannot be ruled out. Therefore, the applicants are not entitled for bail.
6. Having considered the rival contentions of the learned counsels for the parties, perused the case diary, also looking to the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and allegations made against the applicants, this court is of considered view that this is a fit case to grant bail to the applicants. Hence, without expressing any opinion on merit of the case, this application is allowed.
7. It is directed that the applicants- TANIYA, MEGHNA & DEEPA- be released on bail upon their furnishing personal bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty Thousand only) each with two local sureties of Rs.25,000/-(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) to the satisfaction of the concerned trial Court for their appearance before the trial Court on all such dates as may be fixed in this behalf by the trial Court during pendency of the trial. It is further directed that applicants shall comply with the provisions of Section Section 480(3) of The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
8. This order shall be effective till the end of trial but in case of bail Signature Not Verified Signed by: AJIT KAMALASANAN Signing time: 07-08-2024 18:15:25 4 MCRC-31635-2024 jump, it shall become ineffective.
9. With the aforesaid, this application is allowed and stands disposed of.
Certified copy, as per Rules.
(PRAKASH CHANDRA GUPTA) JUDGE ajit Signature Not Verified Signed by: AJIT KAMALASANAN Signing time: 07-08-2024 18:15:25