1
B.A. 567/24
MHCC020036562024
IN THE COURT OF SESSION FOR GREATER BOMBAY
CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION No.567 OF 2024
Sanobar Adnan Chiplunkar
Age : 29 years, Occ : Housewife,
R/at Post. Harne, Tal. Dapoli,
Dist. Ratnagiri.

… Applicant/Accused
– Versus The State of Maharashtra
(At the instance of C.R.No.72/2023
DCB CID Unit IX (Corresponding
C.R.No.904/2023 D.N. Nagar Police Station)
… Respondent
Appearance :Advocate Roshni Singh for the applicant.
APP Iqbal Solkar for the respondent / State
CORAM : RAJESH A. SASNE
ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE,
COURT ROOM No. 30.
DATED : 07/03/2024
ORDER
This is an application filed by the accused u/sec.439 of
Criminal Procedure Code for releasing her on bail in connection with
C.R.No.72/2023 registered with DCB CID Unit-IX, (Corresponding
C.R.No.904/2023 D.N. Nagar Police Station) for the offences punishable
under Sections 370(4), 370(5), 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section
81 of Juvenile Justice Care and Protection Act, 2015.

2
2.

B.A. 567/24
It is alleged by the applicant / accused that she is innocent
and falsely implicated in the present case. The accused is arrested on
29.11.2023.

She
has
undergone
custodial
interrogation.

The
investigation is completed. There are no criminal antecedents against
the accused. Charge sheet is filed. Investigation is completed. Therefore,
there is no point in keeping accused behind bars till conclusion of trial.
She is permanent resident of her given address therefore she prayed for
releasing her on bail.
3.

The prosecution opposed the application by filing reply
vide Exh.2. It is the contention of the prosecution that if accused is
released on bail it will affect the collection of evidence. If accused is
released on bail there are chances of flee from justice. If accused is
released on bail there are chances of threatening of prosecution
witnesses and tampering of prosecution evidence. Hence, prosecution
prayed for rejection of the application.
4.

Read the application, say filed by the prosecution. Heard
the ld. Advocate for the applicant, ld. APP for the respondent / State.
5.

It is the case of the prosecution that the informant Rubina
Khan is the sister of the accused Shabbir Khan. The accused Saniya is
the wife of the accused Shabbir Khan. Therefore, accused Nos.1 and 2
are the husband and wife. It is alleged that they are having habit of
consuming drugs. They have three children, out of their wedlock. Their
elder son is Subhan age four years. They have another son Hussain of
two years and third is baby girl age about two months. The financial
condition of accused Shabbir and Saniya is not sound. They came to
reside at the house of the informant Rubina. Therefore, the informant
3
B.A. 567/24
noticed that both accused are accompanied only by their elder son
Subhan and not by Hussain and newly born baby girl. On repeatedly
asking about said fact and absence of Hussain and baby girl, the
accused Saniya informed that as both of them are in habit of consuming
drugs, therefore, they were not having money and for this reason they
have sold their son Hussain and newly born baby girl. It is alleged that
baby girl was sold at Rs.14,000/- to accused No.3 Shakil Makrani. On
the basis of disclosure statement, two month’s baby girl was released
from the custody of accused No.3 Shakil. On the basis of investigation
the police found that the accused Usha Manikappa, accused Vaishali,
accused Shafik are having active role in the commission of this offence.
It is alleged that accused No.8 Balkrishna B. Kamble has sold his one
year old daughter to the accused No.6 Vaishali. The accused No.7 Shafik
helped for this transaction. Said daughter was released from the
custody of accused No.6 Vaishali. In the investigation the police found
that the applicant / accused No.9 Sonobar Chiplunkar, accused No.10
Tabassum S. Sain and accused No.11 Safiya are also involved in the
commission of this offence. During investigation it was revealed that
accused No.7 Shafik with the help of accused No.8 Balkrishna Kamble
sold his daughter aged about one year two months. The accused Nos.9
and 10 purchased boy namely Ali. Accordingly report was lodged and
offences are registered u/Sec.370 of IPC and section 81 of Juvenile
Justice Care and Protection Act 2015. There is allegation about human
trafficking. There is transaction of buying and purchasing of minor
children for illegal consideration. There is no legal adoption. The
accused is arrested on 29.11.2023
6.

The role attributed to the present applicant / accused is the
she is also involved in the sale and purchase of the child. The present
4
B.A. 567/24
applicant / accused has been arrested on 29.11.2023. The investigation
is completed and charge sheet is already filed. The trial will take its own
time to conclude it on merit. If reasonable conditions securing presence
of accused are imposed, she will be entitled for the bail. Therefore,
incarceration of the accused is unwarranted. Hence I am of the view
that the applicant / accused is entitled for the bail. In the result, I pass
the following order :
ORDER
1]
Bail Application 567 of 2024 is allowed.

2]
Applicant / Accused Sanobar Adnan Chiplunkar, arrested in
C.R.No.72/2023 (Corresponding C.R.No.904/2023 D.N. Nagar Police
Station) under Section 370(4), 370(5), 34 of the Indian Penal Code and
Section 81 of Juvenile Justice Care and Protection Act, 2015, registered
with DCB CID Unit IX be released on bail on furnishing P.B. and S.B. of
Rs.25,000/- with one or two sureties
3]
The applicant / accused shall not tamper with the prosecution
The applicant shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement,
threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so
as to dissuade him from disclosing the facts to Court or any police
officer.
4]
The applicant / accused shall not tamper with the prosecution
witnesses and evidence in any manner.
5]
The applicant / accused shall regularly attend the dates of
hearing of the case, unless exempted by the ld trial court.
6]
Provisional cash bail in the like amount is allowed. The accused
shall furnish surety within 4 weeks from the date of release from jail
failing which the cash bail shall stand forfeited without any separate
order to that effect.

5
7]
B.A. 567/24
The applicant / accused shall not leave India without prior
permission of the Court.
8]
Bail before the concern Magistrate.

Date : 07/03/2024
Dictated on
: 07.03.2024
Transcribed on
: 11.03.2024
Signed by HHJ on : 13.03.2024
( RAJESH A. SASNE )
Additional Sessions Judge,
Gr. Mumbai.

6
B.A. 567/24
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL SIGNED
ORDER.”
14/03/2024
3.05 p.m.

UPLOAD DATE
TIME
J.S. Chavan
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge (With Court H. H. Additional Sessions Judge Shri. R.A.
Room No.)
Sasne, Court Room No. 30.
Date of Pronouncement of ORDER 07/03/2024
ORDER signed by P.O. on
13/03/2024
ORDER uploaded on
14/03/2024