Judgment · High Court
Case at a glance
Provisions considered
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 s. 439
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 ss. 120B, 366A, 370, 370A, 372, 373
- Immoral Trafficking Prevention Act ss. 3, 4, 5, 7, 9
- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 ss. 4, 17
Key paragraphs
- Para 44. Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. (Gaurang Kanth, J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)
Judgment
Mr. Debasis Kar. ...for the Petitioner. Mr. Madhusudan Sur, ld. A.P.P., Ms. Sujata Das. …for the State.
Heard the learned Advocates for the parties. We have considered the materials on record. Petitioner is involved in running of a brothel where women were sexually exploited.
In view of the nature of the offence having severe social consequences and the prima facie materials implicating the petitioner in the crime, we are not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner.
Accordingly, the prayer for bail of the petitioner is rejected. (Gaurang Kanth, J.) (Joymalya Bagchi, J.)
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.
Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.