Court No. - 52 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 16129 of 2010 Petitioner :- Sanjeev Kumar Bediya Respondent :- State Of U.P. Petitioner Counsel :- I.K. Chaturvedi Respondent Counsel :- Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Arvind Kumar Tripathi,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State and
perused the record.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that applicant was maid servant,
who used to assist old mother of the applicant, in domestic work for which he
was being paid food, clothes and Rs.1000/- per month. Even there was no
allegation that she was kidnapped or forcibly kept there. However, Police has
falsely recorded the statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. that she was
compelled for prostitution. She was living for about a year in the house of the
applicant along-with his mother. However, neither she raised alarm nor there
was any attempt to run away from the house. The reason best known to the
prosecutrix even there was no complaint. He further submitted that even she
was not produced before the Magistrate for her statement under Section 164
Cr.P.C. According to medical report, she was above 16 years. There was no
allegation of rape against the applicant. In the present case, the applicant is in
jail since 18.4.2010.
In view of the above, without expressing any opinion on merit, it is a fit case
for bail. Let the applicant Sanjeev Kumar Bediya be enlarged on bail on his
furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the
satisfaction of court concerned in Case Crime No.163 of 2010, under Section
3,4,5,6,7 Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956, P.S. Delhi Gate, District
Meerut.
Order Date :- 28.7.2010
Pramod