Mumbai, August 1, 2022 – Ten individuals, arrested in connection with a major raid on alleged brothels operating in the Girgaon area of Mumbai, have been granted bail by the Sessions Court for Greater Mumbai. The case, which involved allegations of human trafficking and offenses under the Prevention of Immoral Traffic Act (PITA), saw the court grant bail after questioning the strength of the prosecution’s case and the nature of the rescued individuals’ involvement.

The accused, identified as Prabhuprasad Karuprasad Keshri (45), Awadhesh Sahdev Aadar @ Awadesh Yadav (33), Mohammad Arif Ansari (41), Sandeep Mansingh @ Nansingh Sonar (47), Keshwar Jitlas Shah @ Saw (34), Surendra Banwari @ Vanwari Yadav (47), Nanje Chike Gouda @ Nanjegowda (45), Vishnu Bahadur Tilak Singh (58), Smt. T. Mariyamma Das (46), and Meena Chandrappa Gauda (43), were arrested following a raid conducted by the D.B. Marg Police Station and the D.C.B. C.I.D., S.S. Branch. The raid, which led to the registration of two FIRs (C.R. No. 390/2022 and C.R. No. 91/2022), resulted in the rescue of 33 women from the Noor Mohd. Building and White House Building on V.P. Road, Girgaon.

The Allegations and the Defense

The prosecution, led by APP Mrs. Meera Choudhari, alleged that the accused were running a prostitution racket, profiting from the women’s activities, and thus were liable under sections 370 (human trafficking) and 34 (common intention) of the Indian Penal Code, along with sections 3, 4, 5, and 7(1)(b) of the PITA Act.

However, Advocate Dave, representing the accused, vehemently denied the allegations, asserting that his clients were falsely implicated. He argued that the rescued women, aged between 25 and 42, were all adults and had voluntarily engaged in prostitution. He emphasized that no evidence of coercion or force was presented, thus challenging the applicability of the human trafficking charge.

“The core of the human trafficking charge hinges on the elements of coercion, force, or deception,” Advocate Dave argued. “In this case, the rescued women were all adults, and there is no indication that they were compelled into prostitution. Therefore, the very foundation of the prosecution’s case is questionable.”

Court’s Observations and Decision

Additional Sessions Judge Mrs. Madhuri M. Deshpande, presiding over the case, meticulously reviewed the FIR and the submissions from both sides. Notably, the court observed that the prosecution had not sought further custody of the accused for investigation, suggesting that the initial investigation was complete.

The court also took into consideration the fact that the rescued women had not made any specific allegations of being forced into prostitution. This crucial element weakened the prosecution’s claim of human trafficking.

“The absence of specific allegations of coercion or force from the rescued women significantly impacts the strength of the prosecution’s case,” Judge Deshpande stated in her order. “While the offenses under the PITA Act are serious, the lack of evidence supporting the human trafficking charge necessitates a balanced approach.”

The court acknowledged the prosecution’s apprehension that the accused, if released on bail, might tamper with evidence or influence witnesses. However, Judge Deshpande deemed that these concerns could be addressed by imposing stringent bail conditions.

Bail Conditions and Order

Ultimately, the court granted bail to all ten accused, each required to furnish a personal bond of ₹15,000 and a solvent surety of the same amount. The bail was granted with the following conditions:

• The accused must not directly or indirectly influence or threaten any witness.
• They must not tamper with any evidence.
• They must be present in court for every hearing.
• They are prohibited from leaving India without the court’s permission.
• They must not engage in similar offenses in the future.
• They must provide their permanent and temporary addresses and contact details to the court.
• They must not change their residential address without informing the investigating officer and the court.
• Violation of any condition would lead to the cancellation of their bail.

The court concluded that granting bail with these conditions was a just and proper course of action, balancing the rights of the accused with the interests of justice.

Implications and Public Reaction

The decision has sparked a debate on the complexities of enforcing anti-trafficking laws and the rights of sex workers. Legal experts have highlighted the challenges in proving human trafficking when adults are involved.

“This case underscores the delicate balance between combating exploitation and respecting individual autonomy,” a legal analyst commented. “The court’s decision reflects the need for concrete evidence of coercion and force to substantiate human trafficking charges.”

The raid and subsequent bail grant have also brought attention to the ongoing issue of prostitution in Mumbai and the challenges faced by law enforcement in addressing it. The case serves as a reminder of the need for a nuanced approach that considers the rights and vulnerabilities of all parties involved.