Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 5, Cited by 2]

Bombay High Court

Shabnam Umar Shaikh vs The State Of Maharashtra on 3 September, 2018

Author: Prakash D. Naik

Bench: Prakash D. Naik

       Sknair                                              12-ba-1577-18.odt

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


           CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1577 OF 2018


Shabnam Umar Shaikh                                  ... Applicant
      Vs.
State of Maharashtra                                  ... Respondent 
                                 ...
Mr. Aabad Ponda I/by Mr. Ashish Raghuvanshi for the applicant.
Mrs. G.P. Mulekar, APP for the Respondent-State.
                                 ...
                                CORAM  : PRAKASH D. NAIK, J.
                                DATE      :  3rd SEPTEMBER, 2018.
                            

P.C.


1.      This is an application for bail. The applicant was arrested on

25th  January,   2018   in   connection   with   C.R.   No.   I-49   of   2018

registered   with   Mumbra   Police   Station   Thane   for   the   offence

punishable under Sections 371, 370, 120(B) of Indian Penal Code

and Sections 75 and 81 of Juvenile Justice Act.

2.      The   prosecution   case   is   that   the   police   received   the

information that on 25th  January, 2018 one man and woman are

coming at a particular place to sell the new born child.  The police

therefore decided to lay the trap.  Panchas were called.  The police

reached the hospital, one man and woman came near the hospital



                                                                       1 of  5
      Sknair                                                     12-ba-1577-18.odt

holding   one   child.     On   inquiry   they   could   not   give   satisfactory

explanation.  Hence, they were taken in custody.  Women told her

name as Hasina and the other person told his name as Mohd Ayub.

On further inquiry they informed that child was produced by them

from Shabnam whose name was not known to them and further

information is that they had shown the place where they took the

custody   of   the   child.   Applicant   accused   who   had   allegedly

confessed   that   child   was   sold   to   the   couple   for   an   amount   of

Rs.30,000/-.  In pursuant to that FIR was registered, the applicant

was arrested.   The applicant was remanded to custody from time

to time.   The couple who had purchased the child were found in

possession   of   the   child   and   were   also   arrested   and   they   are   in

custody.  The mother of the child was also impleaded as accused.

She   preferred   an   application   for   anticipatory   bail   which   was

allowed by this court vide order dated 2nd August, 2018.  The other

relations of the said accused were also granted anticipatory bail by

this Court. 

3.     Taking   into   consideration   the   case   of   the   prosecution   it

appears that the child was born to the accused Humaira Mohiddin

Sayed and with her consent the child was being sold to the couple.

On perusal of the statement recorded by the police it appears that

                                                                             2 of  5
      Sknair                                                 12-ba-1577-18.odt

the name of the applicant was referred to Mousina to whom the

child was directed to be handed over.  The statement of Mousina

was   recorded   on   29th  January,   2018.     She   is   not   impleaded   as

accused but the statement is being recorded as a witness.

4.    Learned   advocate   for   the   applicant   submitted  that   Section

370 as well as 317 of Indian Penal Code are not attracted in this

case.     Role   attributed to  the,  applicant   is that  she  handed over

child to the couple.   It is further submitted that investigation is

completed   and   the   chargesheet   has   been   filed.     There   are   no

reported criminal antecedents against the applicant.

5.    Learned   APP   submitted   that   the   offence   involves   human

trafficking.     The   present   applicant   handed   over   the   child   to

accused No.1 and 2 and accepted the amount as 30,000/- and as

per CDR report show that the applicant was in contract with other

accused.     Applicant   was   knowingly   involved   in   the   offence   of

human trafficking.  She submitted that section 370 is attracted in

this case.

6.    I have gone through the documents on record.  It is pertinent

to   note   that   the   entire   investigation   is   completed   and   the

chargesheet has been filed.   The applicant is in custody from the

date of arrest.  On perusal of Section 370 of IPC it can be seen it

                                                                         3 of  5
        Sknair                                                12-ba-1577-18.odt

refers to trafficking of person for the purpose of exploitation.  It is

pertinent to note that in the present case new born child was being

sold.   It is not the case of the prosecution that couple who had

purchased the child is indulging in human trafficking.  It is not the

case   of   the   prosecution   that   child   was   sold   through   accused

without the consent of the mother.  Be that as it may, it could not

appropriate to scan the evidence on record at this stage.  However,

applicability of the said provisions is debatable. The applicant is in

custody   from   the   date   of   arrest.   Investigation   is   completed   and

chargesheet   has   been   filed.     The   mother   of   child   and   other

relations impleaded as accused has been granted bail.  

                                   ORDER

i) Criminal Bail Application No. 1577 of 2018 is allowed.

ii) The applicant is directed to be released on bail in connection with C.R. No. I-49 of 2018 registered with Mumbra Police Station on furnishing P.R. Bond of Rs.20,000/- (Rs. Twenty Thousand only) with one or more sureties in the like amount;

iii) The applicant shall attend Mumbra Police Station once in a month on first Saturday between 10 a.m. to 12 noon till conclusion of the trial;

iv) The applicant shall not tamper with the evidence and/or 4 of 5 Sknair 12-ba-1577-18.odt influence the prosecution witnesses.

v) The application stands disposed off.

Digitally ( PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. ) signed by Sachidanand Sachidanand Kuttan Nair Kuttan Nair Date:

2018.09.05 12:00:37 +0530

5 of 5