1appln-3356-10 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL BAIL APPLICATION No. 3356 of 2010 Nemankumar Mahavir Gupta .. Applicant. versus The State of Maharashtra .. Respondent. Mr P.R. Dave, for the Applicant. Mrs A. S. Pai, A.P.P.,for the State. CORAM:- A.R. JOSHI, J. DATE :- 11TH AUGUST, 2010. P.C.:- 1. Heard rival submissions for some time on this anticipatory bail application preferred by the applicant apprehending arrest in the matter of C.R. No.II-26/2010 registered with Miraj Road Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 of Prevention of Immoral Traffic Act (PITA Act for short). 2. On 26.1.2010 on certain information a raid was conducted on the rooms bearing Nos. 35,38 and 50 in MHADA Colony and certain 2appln-3356-10 girls, some of them of minor age, were taken in custody along with other co-accused persons under the premise that those girls were compelled to indulge in the prostitution and for the offence punishable under the relevant Sections of PITA. First Information Report was lodged by the police officer. Statements of the girls were recorded. So far as the present applicant is concerned, apart from taking the names of other co-accused, some of them are already arrested, name of the present applicant is also taken by three girls. Out of them allegedly one girl by name Dipa Shaikh is aged 14 to 16 years as per the medical report. However, as per her statement recorded by the police, she had given her name as 20 years and she has mentioned that she is married and her husband is residing at her native place in Kolkata (West Bengal). There are specific allegations taking the name of the present applicant that he along with other two accused by names Ramdev and Swami had taken the rooms for the purpose of compelling girls in the prostitution. 3. During the arguments, it is specifically brought to the notice of the Court that said one girl by name Dipa Shaikh is already married and has stated her age as 20 years, hence it could not be accepted that she is of the age of 14 to 16 years. Whether or not said girl Dipa 3appln-3356-10 Shaikh is of a minor age, is the question that can be determined during the trial. Even also minority or otherwise of the said girl or other girls is of no much significance. The name of the present applicant is specifically taken in her statement. 4. Considering the above circumstances, it would not be in the fitness of situation to grant discretionary relief of pre-arrest bail in favour of the applicant. In the result, the following order:- ORDER: (a) Anticipatory bail application is hereby rejected. (b) Any observations made in this order shall not be construed as any finding or any expression of opinion on the merits of the case at the time of trial. Application is disposed of in above terms. (A.R.JOSHI,J) LRS-PA