1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 3694 / 2009 [(1)Sunita @ Billo Mohansingh Kalkhor and 2 others vs. State of Maharashtra ) ..................................................................................................................................................................... Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ..................................................................................................................................................................... Mr. R S Renu Adv. for applicant Mr A S Fulzele, APP for Respondent .......... CORAM : A.P.BHANGALE, J. DATED : JANUARY 20, 2010. Heard. 2. By means of this application, the applicants are seeking grant of bail in connection with Crime No. 5304/2009 reported at Lakadganj Police Station, Nagpur for offence punishable u/ss. 3,4,5,6,7 and 8 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 as also u/s 372, 373 and 34 IPC. It is submitted that the applicants were arrested on 7.8.2009 and are in custody since then. It is further submitted that while applicant no.1 is the aunty of the complainant-girl, applicants 2 and 3 are the parents. According to learned Advocate for applicants, the complainant -girl is not a minor considering her Election Identity Card and there was no evidence regarding her date of birth. Therefore, it is submitted that provisions of IPC for offence punishable u/s 372 and 373 are not attracted. 2 3. Per contra, learned APP contended that the complainant-girl had reported the offence and it was investigated and charge-sheet is also filed before the JMFC Court No.3 Nagpur on 11.9.2009. It appears that the applicants had applied for discharge in Sessions Trial No. 408/2009 but the Trial Court appears to have rejected an application for discharge after concluding that prima facie case u/s.s 373 and 373 IPC, is made out by passing a reasoned order on 14th October, 2009. Regarding final opinion as to age of the complainant -girl, it appears that the trial Court did not overrule the possibility that she may be below 18 years of age. Thus, it would depend upon the evidence in the trial Court about the exact age of the complainant -girl as also as to whether provisions of IPC are attracted or not. 4. Learned Advocate for the applicants made reference to ruling in Anthony Britto vs.State of Goa: 2007 ALL MR (Cri) 1950 in order to submit that in such a case benefit of bail was granted in favour of the accused subject to certain conditions. It appears a case in respect of one of the accused facing prosecution u/s.3,4,5,6 & 7 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention ) Act, 1956 and Sec. 8(2) of the Goa Children Act, 2003. This Court after considering the submissions made before it, appears to have observed that the offences against the applicant are not very serious so as to deprive him of being admitted to bail. The learned Advocate for the applicant therefore wants to persuade this Court to grant benefit of bail in 3 favour of the applicants. However looking into the facts and circumstances disclosed from investigation in respect of the present case, it does appear that applicant no.1 Sunita gave her address as R/o Ganga Jamuna Itwari, Nagpur ; while applicant nos. 2 and 3 gave their address as Itwari Nagpur. The applicant no.2 mentioned his occupation as Agriculturist; however, no information is furnished to this court in order to accept that applicants are having fixed addresses. The vague or insufficient information regarding addresses of the applicants who are seeking bail cannot be accepted because it would be risky to grant bail in favour of such accused as it would be difficult to procure their presence at the time of their trial. For these reasons, I am not inclined to grant benefit of bail in their favour. But if they can furnish sufficient information as regards their addresses and the trial court believe that they are not prima facie involved in respect of the prosecution case, after perusing material collected during the investigation regarding age of the complainant -girl, the trial Court may consider entire material collected during the investigation and may grant bail on its own merit provided sufficient and full information is submitted regarding addresses of the applicants. Even otherwise the trial Court shall try to dispose of the case as early as possible if benefit of bail is denied to them. Humdast granted. JUDGE sahare