The Court of Session for Greater Bombay has rejected the bail application of Godfrey Thomas Alvares (39), accused in a serious case of human trafficking, wrongful confinement, and extortion (C.R. No. 33/2024 of DCB CID Unit VIII).

Additional Sessions Judge Rajesh A. Sasne, in the order dated May 4, 2024, found that the applicant actively participated in a crime where victims were lured abroad for jobs, then detained in Laos and forced to work in a bogus call center, and subsequently extorted for money under threat to their lives to secure their release. Given the serious nature of the allegations, the existence of a magistrate’s statement (under Section 164 Cr.P.C.), and the ongoing, primary stage of the investigation, the Court concluded that releasing the accused would hamper the investigation and allow him to tamper with evidence.

Case Details and Allegations

The applicant, an agent, was booked under a multitude of serious sections:

• IPC Sections: 420 (Cheating), 370 (Trafficking of Person), 323 (Voluntarily causing hurt), 342, 346, 347 (Wrongful Confinement), 386 (Extortion), 504, 506 (Threats), 34, 120(B) (Criminal Conspiracy).
• Emigration Act: Section 10, 24.

The core allegations are:

1. The applicant and his associates, operating without a valid license, engaged in human trafficking.
2. Victims were offered jobs in Thailand but were forcefully taken to Laos.
3. They were engaged in a bogus call center and were wrongfully detained.
4. When victims attempted to return, they were subjected to extortion with threats to life, including a recorded instance where the applicant’s account received ₹92,000/- for the release of one victim, Divakar Chaturvedi.
5. Police have collected various e-mails from affected persons and recorded a statement of a witness, Rena Mendosa, under Section 164 of the Cr.P.C., detailing her detention and release.

Court’s Rationale for Rejection

The Court considered the gravity of the offenses, the evidence on record, and the status of the investigation:

1. Serious Allegations of Trafficking: The Court noted the severe nature of the allegations, specifically mentioning wrongful detention, human trafficking, and unlawful extortion by giving a threat to life.
2. Active Role and Evidence: The investigation revealed the applicant’s account received extorted funds, demonstrating his active participation in the crime. The existence of a Section 164 statement (a formal, recorded witness deposition) confirms the seriousness and weight of the prosecution’s case.
3. Investigation Status: Despite the arrest being made in March 2024, the Court concluded the investigation is still “in progress” and at a “primary stage.”
4. Risk of Tampering: The Judge held that releasing the applicant at this stage would likely hamper the investigation and allow the accused to tamper with prosecution evidence and witnesses.

The bail application (Criminal Bail Application No. 1054 of 2024) was therefore rejected.