The Bombay High Court refused to grant bail to two women accused of ‘providing minor girls’ and forcing them into prostitution. While refusing bail, Justice Sarang Kotwal observed, “There is sufficient material by the investigating agency to show that one of the victims was a minor and, therefore, it assumes seriousness.”
WHAT IS THE CASE?
One of the police constables working with the Crime Detection Unit of Mumbai received information that the two applicants, Babita Sharma and Shweta Sharma, were exploiting minor girls by forcing them into prostitution. Based on this information, they conducted a raid by arranging a bogus customer.
ALSO READ: Sheena Bora murder case: Bombay High Court refuses bail to Indrani Mukerjea
The customer arranged for a call with Shweta and asked for supplies for a minor girl. Shweta informed him that she had a minor girl, for Rs 2 lakh, as well as an adult girl, for Rs 50,000. When the customer agreed to the minor, a location for the transaction was fixed, which is where the police intercepted the two applicants with the two girls.
During a search of the applicants, the police discovered that Babita was carrying an Aadhaar card of the minor. When asked as to why an Aadhaar, she said that customers ask for age proof of girl when they want a minor. The Aadhaar card of the minor girl clearly stated that she was only 15 years of age. While interrogating the another girl, it was found out that Babita was her mother.
CASE REGISTERED
With all this backdrop, the Amboli Police Station, Mumbai registered the applicants for offences under Section 366A (procuration of minor girl), 370(1) (trafficking), 372 (selling minor for prostitution) and sections 4 and 5 of The Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act and 4 (penetrative sexual assault), 16, 17 and 18 (abetment to offence) of Protection of Children against Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act.
The applicants moved for bail claiming that they had been in custody since their arrest, which was in February 2021. The investigation was also complete and a charge sheet had also been filed against them.
ALSO READ: Bombay HC stays Debt Recovery Tribunal order in favour of Nirvaan Birla
Their counsel Niranjan Mundargi also pointed out that Section 370 of the IPC was not attracted as there was no minor involved (as the school records would show). He showed school records to state that both the girls were adults and were in the profession of their own will.
Justice Kotwal noted, “To make matters worse, it transpired that the applicants are the close relatives of the victims and they were forcing these young girls into prostitution. This is nothing short of ‘sexual exploitation”.
On the aspect of school records, Justice Kotwal stated that the same was the matter in the trial.
“All these offences are quite serious. One of the victims is shown to be a minor at this stage. The FIR is supported by the victims’ screenshots, the Aadhaar card seized in the hotel and the statements of other raiding party members,” the order was recorded in conclusion while rejecting the application.
ALSO READ: Bombay High Court asks Centre if there’s ‘national plan’for Covid
Source: https://www.indiatoday.in/india/story/bombay-high-court-rejects-bail-plea-two-women-involved-prostitution-racket-1903534-2022-01-24
