MANOJ GOVINDRAO JADHAV Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant is seeking regular bail in connection with Crime No.469 of 2019 registered with Pundliknagar Police Station, District Aurangabad for the offences punishable under Section 370(A)(2) of IPC, Section 3, 4, 5, 6 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956, Section 65(E) of the Bombay Prohibition Act and Section 67, 67(A) of Information Technology Act. His application with similar prayer came to be rejected by the Additional Sessions Judge, Aurangabad vide order dated 24.02.2020 in Criminal Bail Petition No.297 of 2020.

(2.) The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the co-accused Kavita Jadhav and Sanjay Kapse run the brothel and merely on their disclosure the present applicant came to be arrested in connection with the present crime on 11.12.2019. The learned counsel submits that it has been alleged against the applicant that he used to send a picture of a girl through his mobile phone to the customers. In view of the said allegation the learned counsel submits that at the most Section 5(b) of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 stands attracted which is punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term not less than three (3) years and not more than seven (7) years. The learned counsel submits that the antecedents of the applicant are clear. So far as the charge under Section 67 and 67A of the Information Technology Act are concerned, those are punishable with imprisonment for three (3) years and five (5) years respectively. The learned counsel submits that there is no incriminating evidence against the applicant. The charge-sheet has been submitted on 04.02.2020. The applicant is ready to abide any condition, if imposed by this Court. The applicant may be released on bail.

(3.) The learned APP has strongly resisted the application on the ground that the applicant was the agent to procure a person for the purpose of prostitution. The learned APP submits that prima facie there is a strong case against the applicant. During the course of investigation his mobile came to be seized. It has been also revealed during the course of investigation that the applicant used to send the photographs of the victims to prospective customers on WhatsAPP and as such he has actively participated in the commission of crime. The learned APP submits that the application is liable to be rejected and applicant may not be released on bail.