Mumbai, May 3, 2024 – The Additional Sessions Judge S.M. Tapkire at the Sessions Court for Greater Bombay rejected the bail applications of two women, Smt. Divya Kailash Singh (33) and Smt. Payal Hemant Shah (32), who are accused in connection with the kidnapping of a five-year-old girl. The order, passed on April 30, 2024, pertains to C.R. No. 187/2024 registered at the Bhandup Police Station for offences punishable under Sections 306 (Abetment of suicide), 370 (Trafficking of persons), and 34 (Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) of the Indian Penal Code1 (IPC).
The bail application, numbered 889 of 2024, was filed by the accused women seeking their release on bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. They were represented by their advocate, Mr. Aniket Yadav. The State of Maharashtra, represented by the learned Special Public Prosecutor (S.P.P.) S.V. Kekanis, strongly opposed the bail plea, submitting a written statement (Exh – 3) outlining their objections.
The prosecution’s case, as presented in court, reveals that initially, the crime was registered against a co-accused, Khushbu Gupta. However, during the course of the investigation, the alleged involvement of the current applicants, Divya Singh and Payal Shah, came to light when the five-year-old kidnapped victim was found in their custody.
The allegations against the accused state that on March 24, 2024, at approximately 9:00 p.m., the minor girl was participating in the Holi festival. It is alleged that Khushbu Gupta took the child away without the consent of her parents in an autorickshaw to her residence. This incident was reportedly witnessed by one Salim. Subsequent inquiry into the incident allegedly revealed Khushbu Gupta’s involvement, who purportedly stated that she handed over the custody of the kidnapped minor child to the applicants in exchange for a consideration of ₹1,00,000/- from them.
Divya Singh and Payal Shah were arrested on March 25, 2024. The prosecution claims that mobile handsets were recovered and seized from their custody. The applicants, however, have denied all the allegations, claiming false implication at the behest of the co-accused Khushbu.
The State vehemently opposed the bail, arguing that the allegations against the applicants and their co-accused suggest the existence of a syndicate or gang involved in kidnapping minor children for financial gain. The prosecution further contended that significant material facts and circumstances are yet to be discovered and that the charge sheet has not yet been filed.
After hearing the arguments from both sides and considering the submitted documents and objections, Additional Sessions Judge S.M. Tapkire stated that he was “prima-facie inclined against the applicants.” The court noted the serious allegations that the applicants unlawfully took custody of the five-year-old girl from Khushbu Gupta. It is alleged that Khushbu Gupta kidnapped the child based on the assurance given by the applicants to pay her ₹1,00,000/- for providing a minor female child.
The court emphasized that the involvement of the applicants transpired through the statement of the co-accused Khushbu and that “certainly serious in natures allegations have been raised” against them. Furthermore, the court noted the availability of “considerable material” regarding their alleged participation, including the statement of the minor victim.
Judge Tapkire concluded that crucial facts and circumstances are yet to be clarified, detected, and investigated. Considering the seriousness and gravity of the crime, the serious allegations leveled against the applicants, and the requirement for a detailed investigation, the court found no “justified substance force” in the grounds raised by the applicants for bail.
Consequently, the court passed the order rejecting the Criminal Bail Application No. 889 of 2024.
This order signifies a setback for the accused women, highlighting the court’s concern over the serious nature of the allegations and the ongoing investigation into the alleged child kidnapping and potential trafficking network. The case will now proceed further as the investigation continues and the legal process unfolds.