Mumbai, Maharashtra – May 2, 2022 – Jeevanand Thangaraj, the manager of a spa, has been granted bail by the Sessions Court for Greater Mumbai in a case registered under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act (PITA) and relevant sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The court, presided over by Additional Sessions Judge Sonali P. Agarwal, granted bail, noting the consent of the adult victims involved and the absence of evidence indicating they were trafficked.
Thangaraj was arrested in connection with C.R. No. 246 of 2022, registered at the Santacruz Police Station, and was charged under Section 370(2) read with 34 of the IPC, along with Sections 4 and 5 of PITA.
Background of the Case:
The prosecution alleged that a raid was conducted at Ayour Thai Spa, where Thangaraj, the spa manager, and three victims were found. The prosecution claimed that the victims were working as spa therapists and engaging in prostitution, with Thangaraj taking a cut of their earnings. The spa was allegedly rented by co-accused Pritam Raj, Thangaraj’s brother.
Applicant’s Arguments for Bail:
Nikhil Mengade, representing Thangaraj, argued that his client had been running the business for several years, and the premises were under CCTV surveillance. He stated that the victims were certified spa therapists with valid licenses and had been working at the spa for a long time. Mengade also submitted affidavits from two of the victims, stating they were not forced into any activity and that Thangaraj did not coerce them. He contended that Section 370 of the IPC, which pertains to trafficking, was not applicable in this case.
Prosecution’s Objections:
Meera Choudhary-Bhosale, representing the State, opposed the bail, arguing that the spa was a front for prostitution and that Thangaraj might pressure witnesses if released. The prosecution stated they were investigating a potential sex racket run by the accused.
Court’s Observations and Decision:
Judge Agarwal noted that the raid occurred on March 30, 2022, and that Thangaraj had provided registration certificates for the spa. The court also considered the affidavits from the victims, who stated they were working willingly and were not forced. The court observed that the prosecution had not provided any evidence indicating the victims were trafficked, despite having sent them to a safe custody facility.
The court acknowledged the arguments and precedents cited by the applicant’s counsel, particularly Ms. Ralte Lalrinawmi v. The State of Maharashtra, which highlighted the rights of adult victims to choose their vocation. The court found this precedent applicable, as the victims in this case were adults who claimed they were not forced.
Bail Conditions:
The court granted bail to Thangaraj, subject to the following conditions:
- Thangaraj must furnish a Personal Bond (PB) and Surety Bond (SB) of Rs. 15,000 with one or two sureties of the same amount.
- He must not threaten or cause injury to the informant.
- He must not tamper with prosecution evidence.
- He must cooperate with the police investigation.
- He must attend the Santacruz Police Station every Wednesday between 5:00 PM and 7:00 PM until the police file the final report.
- He must not directly or indirectly influence any witnesses.
- He must provide his mobile number, phone number, and all addresses to the Investigating Officer and inform them of any changes.
Outcome:
The court’s decision highlights the importance of considering the consent of adult victims in cases involving PITA. The court’s reliance on the victims’ affidavits and the absence of evidence of trafficking played a significant role in granting bail. The imposed conditions aim to ensure Thangaraj’s cooperation with the investigation and prevent any potential interference with the legal process.