IN THE COURT OF THE SPECIAL JUDGE FOR N.D.P.S. CASES
AT GREATER MUMBAI
CRI. BAIL APPLICATION NO. 851 OF 2022
IN
C. R. No. 354/2022
Fahed Chand Shaikh
Age : 26 yrs.,
R/o : Lal Prem Chawl,
Gaodevi Dongar, Jaiprakash Road,
Andheri (W), Mumbai – 400 058.
…Applicant/Accused
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra
Kandivali Police Station
…Respondent
Appearance :Mr. Madan Gupta, Adv. for applicant/accused.
Mr. Rajput, APP for respondent/State.
CORAM : HIS HONOUR THE SPECIAL JUDGE
V. V. PATIL (C.R. NO. 44).
DATE
: 6th July, 2022
ORDER
The present application for grant of bail has been filed by
applicant Fahed Chand Shaikh u/sec. 439 of Cr.P.C., who has been
arrested by the officers of respondent on 4.4.2022 for violation of
offences punishable u/sec. 370 A(2) r/w 34 IPC r/w 4 & 5 of Immoral
Traffic (Prevention) Act r/w 8(c), 20 & 22(a) of NDPS Act, 1985 in C.R.
No. 354/2022.
2.

It is the case of prosecution that on 11.6.2022 the officers of the
respondent received secret information about business of prostitution
being conducted in their jurisdiction in a massage parlor known as D2
Uko Spa, accordingly bogus customer and panchas were arranged.
3.

Said bogus customer along with the panchas and officers of
respondent went to the place of incident and thereafter, after receipt of
the signal, police entered into the premises, where
the co-accused
Sohel Dhanani was found at the Spa. The bogus customer was found
with one lady in the cabin. Then victim was rescued and co-accused
Sohel Dhanani came to be arrested as Manager of the said Spa. During
search, said Dhanani was found in possession of 0.81 gms. of MD and
1.05 gms. of Ganja, which came to be seized under panchanama and
FIR came to be registered against said Sohel Dhanani and wanted
accused Fahed Shaikh i.e. present applicant and Dipika Ramesh Tal vide
C.R. No. 354/2022. Thereafter present applicant came to be arrested in
the present case.
4.

The present applicant/accused has sought bail on the grounds
that he is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in the present
case. Applicant was not found in the Spa when the raid was conducted
by the Police. The applicant
had not shown any girl to the bogus
customer nor he accepted any amount from the bogus customer as he
was not found at the Spa. The victim is major by age and she is not in
the custody of protective home and not available for recording the
statement against the accused since she ran away from police custody.
She was produced before Ld. M.M., 54 th Court. Her enquiry under sec.
17 of PITA Act and was held during enquiry she denied that she was
involved in flesh trade business. No prima-facie case is made out against
the applicant and applicant was arrested only on the statement of co-
accused. The applicant is ready to abide by any condition imposed by
the Court. Hence he prayed for releasing him on bail.
5.

Application is opposed by the respondent by filing say vide Exh.2.

It is contended that nature of offence is very serious. Applicant is owner
of the Massage Parlor, who with the help of co-accused Sohel Dhanani
and wanted accused Deepika Tal supplied the girl namely Muskan
working as beautician in the parlor for purpose of prostitution. If
applicant is granted bail, he may put pressure on victim and tamper the
prosecution witnesses. If applicant is released on bail, he may abscond
and he will help co-accused to abscond and likely to indulge in similar
activities. Hence respondent prayed for rejecting the application.
6.

Perused application and say. Heard both sides.

7.

It is argued by Ld. Adv. for the applicant that nothing has been
recovered from present applicant. He was even not present when the
parlor was raided. He is not owner of the parlor. The copy of Leave
and License of Agreement is filed by applicant which shows that the
applicant is not party of the agreement. There is nothing on record to
show
on record about involvement of the accused.

Hence he be
released on bail.
8.

Per contra, it is argued by Ld. APP that there was information
received that in D2 Eco Spa, business of prostitution is done in the
name of massage. Hence panch and bogus customer was called and
trap was laid.

Further, when bogus customer was sent to the parlor,
accused no.1 was present there. Thereafter as per plan, the raid was
effected and accused no.1 came to be arrested. Further 0.81 gms. of
MD and 1.05 gms. of Ganja was recovered from the him. It is revealed
during investigation that present applicant is the owner of the said Spa
and he is indulging in illegal activities with accused no.1 as alleged by
the prosecution. Therefore, he is not entitled to grant of bail.
9.

Perused the application and say. Heard. Ld. Adv. for the applicant
and Ld. APP for the state.
10.

Perusal of documents reveal that police raided the Spa for
immoral trafficking of women. Present applicant was allegedly owner of
the said Spa. Applicant
has denied that he was owner of the Spa.

Prosecution has not produced on record any document in support of its
claim that the present applicant was owner of the Spa. Prosecution
claimed that applicant used to supply girls for prostitution under the
name of massage with the help of accused no.1 Sohel and one Deepika
Tal. However, at this stage, no material is placed on record by the
prosecution in support of its contention. Therefore, prima-facie there is
no evidence on record regarding the same. Further nothing has been
recovered from or at the instance of present applicant. There is no
prima-facie cogent evidence on record showing complicity of present
applicant in commission of offence.
11.

There are no criminal antecedents to the discredit of the
applicant. The applicant is
resident of Mumbai and there are no
chances of his absconding or fleeing from justice. Applicant is ready to
undertake any condition imposed by the Court and ready to co-operate
investigating machinery. Hence I hold that applicant is entitled to grant
of bail subject to imposing certain terms and conditions. In the result, I
proceed to pass following order.

ORDER
1. Bail Application no. 851/2022 is hereby allowed.
2. Applicant/accused Fahed Chand Shaikh be released in C.R. No.
354/2022 of Kandivali Police Station on executing P. R. Bond of
Rs.50,000/- (Rs. Fifty Thousand only) with one or more sureties in the
like amount.
3.Applicant/accused to attend the Kandivali Police Station on every
Monday in between 2.00 p.m. to 5.00 p.m., till filing of charge-sheet.
4. Applicant/accused and his sureties shall provide their respective
mobile numbers and correct address of residence alongwith names of
two relatives with their mobile numbers and addresses.
5. Applicant/accused shall produce the proof of his identity and proof of
residence at the time of the executing the Bail Bond.
6. Applicant/accused shall not tamper with prosecution witnesses/
evidence in any manner and co-operate in early disposal of trial.
7. Applicant/accused shall not commit similar offence while on bail.
8. The bail application no. 851/2022 is disposed off accordingly.

(V. V. PATIL)
Special Judge (N.D.P.S.),
City Civil & Sessions Court,
Gr. Mumbai.

Date : 06.07.2022
Dictated on
Transcribed on
Signed on
: 06.07.2022
: 06.07.2022
: 06.07.2022
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGEMENT/ORDER”
UPLOAD DATE
14.07.2022
Name of the Judge
TIME
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
11.00 a.m.

Mrs. S. W. Tuscano
HHJ Shri V. V. Patil
(CR No.44)
Date of Pronouncement of
Judgment/Order.
Judgment/order signed by P.O on
Judgment/order uploaded on
06.07.2022
06.07.2022
14.07.2022