1
BA No.568/2024
MHCC020037842024
IN THE COURT OF SESSIONS AT GREATER BOMBAY
BAIL APPLICATION NO.568 OF 2024
Lalbahadur Parasnath Gupta
Aged 40 years, Occ. : Rickshaw Driver,
R/at. Kisan Nagar No.2, Indira Nagar Chawl,
Road No.21, Near Shivsena Upshakha,
Wagle Estate, Thane.

..Applicant
V/s.
State of Maharashtra
(At the instance of Navghar
Police Station, Mumbai in
C.R. No.317/2023).

..Respondent
Appearance :­
Advocate Mr. Siddhesh Samel for the applicant.
APP Mr. R.V. Tiwari for the respondent/State.
CORAM : HHJ SHRI N.G. SHUKLA,
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE,
COURT ROOM No. 29.
DATED : 13/03/2024
ORDER
(Dictated and pronounced in open Court)
1.

Applicant/accused who is arrested in Crime No.317/2023 for
the offence punishable under Sections 370(1)(3) of Indian Penal Code and
Sections 4 and 5 of Prevention of Immoral Trafficking Act has filed this
second application for bail under Section 439 of The Code of Criminal
Procedure. Prosecution filed say at Exh.2 and opposed the application.

2
2.

BA No.568/2024
I have heard learned Advocate Mr. Siddhesh Samel for
applicant and Learned APP Mr. R.V. Tiwari for prosecution.
3.

As per allegations in FIR, police received secret information for
Immoral Trafficking of women for prostitution and the police sent dummy
customer. The applicant brought two victim women from his rickshaw for
prostitution and accepted the amount of Rs.2,000/­ from said dummy
customer and then police intercepted them.
4.

Leaned advocate for applicant submitted that, the earlier
application for bail was rejected as the investigation was in progress and
charge­sheet was not filed. Now, investigation is completed and charge­
sheet is filed. Trial will take much time. Role of applicant is not major
except brining the victim at the spot and accepting the amount.
Considering all this, learned advocate prayed to grant bail to applicant.
5.

Learned APP argued that as per FIR, applicant is part of racket
and he knowingly brought ladies for prostitution before the dummy
customer. Amount of Rs.2,000/­ has been seized from the applicant. If
released on bail, applicant may tamper the evidence. Hence, learned APP
prayed to reject the application.
6.

I have considered the submissions.

As per FIR, the role
attributed to applicant/accused appears to be limited to the extent of
brining victims at the spot and accepting the amount from dummy
customer. Investigation is completed and charge­sheet is filed. Trial will
not commence and conclude in near future. Considering all this, applicant
is entitled for bail. Condition can be imposed for avoiding tampering of
3
BA No.568/2024
evidence. Hence, I pass following order :­
ORDER
1. Bail Application No.568 of 2024 in CR No. 317/2023 is allowed.
2. Applicant Lalbahadur Parasnath Gupta be released on bail by executing
P.R. bond of Rs.25,000/­ and one or two sureties of like amount.
3. Applicant shall not contact, give threats or induce to informant and
other witnesses in any manner and not to tamper with the evidence of the
prosecution.
4. Applicant shall attend each and every date of the case in the concerned
Court till conclusion of trial of this offence and to give his proof of
residential address and contact number to investigation officer and update
the same time to time.
5. Bail Application No.568 of 2024 in CR No. 317/2023 stands disposed off
accordingly.

Date : 13/03/2024
(N.G. Shukla)
Additional Sessions Judge,
City Civil and Sessions Court,
Greater Bombay
4
BA No.568/2024
CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED
JUDGMENT/ORDER
Name of Stenographer
Upload date and time
Name of the Judge
: Mrs. Shravanti Karre
: 13th March, 2024 (At 03.47 pm.)

H.H.THE ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE
SHRI N. G. SHUKLA (C.R.No.29)
Date of Pronouncement of Order 13th March, 2024
Order signed by P.O. on
13th March, 2024
Order uploaded on
13th March, 2024