{1} IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 4099 OF 2009 Vittal Bhatku Patil APPLICANT VERSUS The State of Maharashtra RESPONDENT ....... Mr.B.R.Waramaa, Advocate for applicant Mr.N.R.Shaikh, APP for the respondent State ....... [CORAM : A.V.POTDAR, J.] DATE: 30th November 2009 PER COURT: 1. By the present application, the applicant has prayed to release him on bail in connection with CR No.251/2009 registered with Shirpur Police Station for an offence punishable u/s 363, 366, 366-k, 376, 504, 506 r/w 34 of the Indian Penal Code and u/s 4, 5 & 6 of the Immoral Traffic Act. 2. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, followed by the submissions of the learned APP. Perused the papers of investigation, till carried out. {2} 3. It appears that the FIR is registered on 29th October 2009 on the complaint of one Kakuli Nimay Sarkar, who hails from West Bengal and under the pretext of marriage she was brought here and taking the disadvantage that she is lonely, accused No.1 had kept her at the place of accused No.3 where she was forced to indulge in prostitution business run by Chhabibai and hence the compliant. 4. During the course of investigation, on 30.10.2009, name of the applicant came into picture as he used to take the cash collected from the business of prostitution run by Chhabibai. The applicant came to be arrested and arrayed as an accused. 5. It is informed that the applicant is arrested on 30.10.2009 and since then he is in jail. According to learned counsel for the applicant, the applicant is nowhere related with the brothel owner, Chhabibai and he cannot be termed as husband of said Chhabibai. At the most if he found connected with the said offence, then the maximum punishment is of 2 years RI and hence it is prayed to release him on bail. 6. Learned APP opposed the said application on the ground that during the course of investigation supplementary statement of the complainant came to be recorded and she has not only gave the description of the applicant but also stated that he is the person who used to collect the cash of the brothel. Apart from {3} the supplementary statement of the complainant four minor girls who were found indulged into prostitution also gave the description of the applicant as a person who used to visit the brothel to collect cash from the business of prostitution. It is also urged that now the investigation is in progress and if at this stage the applicant is released on bail, then it is likely that he may tamper the prosecution witnesses. 7. Considering the rival submissions, it is clear that not only the description of the applicant is given in the supplementary statement of the complainant but also statements recorded of the four minor girls, who were brought from West Bengal to drag into prostitution, disclose that the applicant used to collect the cash from the brothel. At the same time, at least at this stage, when the investigation is yet to complete, the supplementary statement of the complainant as well as statements of the four minor girls, cannot be easily discarded. In the premise, at least, at this stage, no case is made out to release the applicant on bail. 8. In the result, the application stands rejected. [A.V.POTDAR, J.] drp/criapln4099-09