KABC010079962024 IN THE COURT OF XLV ADDL. CITY CIVIL & SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH-46) DATED THIS THE 01st DAY OF JULY 2024 PRESENT: SRI. MOHAMMED MOINUDDIN BA LLB(SPL)., XLV Addl. City Civil & Sessions Judge, Bengaluru. CRL.MISC. 2850/2024 BETWEEN Petitioner Nabukenya Betty Nasimiya D/o Kato Moses, 29 years R/at No.13, 1st floor, House No.03, Jerubebal, 12th cross N.S Palya, BTM 2nd stage Bengaluru (By Sri. Devaraj P.Adv) AND Respondent State by Mico layout P.S Bengaluru. (By the learned Public Prosecutor) ORDERS ON PETITION FILED U/S. 439 OF Cr.P.C., This petition is filed by the petitioner seeking regular bail in Crime No.106/2024 registered by Mico layout Police Station, Bengaluru for the offences PUS 3, Crl.Misc.No.2850/2024 4 and 5 of Immoral Traffic Prevention Act 1956 and Sec.370 of IPC and section 14 of Foreigners Act.

2. The gist of prosecution case is as under;

That on definite information the first informant about prostitution being done in house No.3 situated in Kuvempu nagar of Bengaluru city on 16-03-2024 he in presence of Panchas raided that place and found some customers including the foreigner women used for prostitution for gain. Thereby the first informant and IO at about 6-30 pm has recovered cash of Rs.1,500-00 passport of foreign women and prepared mahazar in presence of panchas apprehended the accused. Thereafter, based on written information lodged by him the SHO of respondent PS has registered a case against the petitioner for the offences described above of their PS.

3. The petitioner has contended that, she is

innocent and not committed any offence much less the offences alleged against her. She further submitted that, none of the offences alleged against her are punishable either with death or imprisonment for life. She also submitted that, she is ready to furnish surety and prepared to obey the conditions since she is in judicial custody as such prayed to allow the petition and release her on bail.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor has filed

objections along with IO report stating that, the case registered by Mico layout PS in Crime No.106/2024 is Crl.Misc.No.2850/2024 based on input received as to commission of offences PUS 3, 4 and 5 of ITP Act. The state has further submitted that, 16-03-2024 the IO after receiving definite information about prostitution being done in a building No.3 in Kuvempu nagar he raided and found some customer and accused involved in prostitution. The IO has recovered cash of Rs.1,500-00 and passport of foreign women. Thereafter based on the true facts the case has been registered against the petitioner and the materials are enough to show that, the petitioner is involved in immoral trafficking of women for prostitution.

5. Since the petitioner is accused in the case

registered for non-bailable offence if she is released on bail then she may abscond from jurisdiction. Further there is chance for commission of similar offences by the accused. That apart there is chance that she may cause threat to the prosecution witnesses and she may also abscond from the territorial jurisdiction of this court.

6. The petitioner has not shown any good reason

to extend the benefit of section 439 of Cr.P.C. thereby the state has prayed to reject the bail petition in the interest of justice.

7. The following points that arises for

consideration: Whether the petitioner is entitled for anticipatory bail? Crl.Misc.No.2850/2024

8. I have heard the learned counsel for petitioner

and the learned public prosecutor. I have perused the available materials in the file my finding on the above point is in affirmative for the following; R E A S O N S 9.Point No.1:-The petitioner has produced the certified copies of FIR and first information lodged by the IO before the SHO. A perusal of the materials on record it appears that, the accused/petitioner and others allegedly forced the victims to do prostitution for money and for that the petitioner has used the resident building.

10. Even for the sake of arguments the allegations

leveled against the petitioner are taken as true then at the most at this stage it can be said that, offence PUS 3, 4 and 5 of ITP Act would attract against the accused. The offence alleged against the petitioner PUS 3 and 4 are bailable in nature though the offence PUS 5 of ITP Act and Section 370(2) of IPC non-bailable but they are neither punishable with death or imprisonment for life. Thus, taking into consideration the fact that, the petitioner is under judicial custody from months and nature of offence alleged against the petitioner I am of the opinion that, the petitioner is entitled for bail. As regards the apprehension of the state it can be suitably meted out by imposing reasonable conditions on petitioner. Crl.Misc.No.2850/2024

11. Thus for the discussion made above I hold that

the petitioner has satisfied that, he is entitled for anticipatory bail subject to reasonable conditions. Hence, I answer the above point in affirmative. In the result I proceed to pass the following; O R D E R The petition filed by the petitioner U/S.439 of Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed. Thereby the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on execution of personal bond for Rs.1,00,000-00 with a surety for the like sum and cash security of Rs,30,000-00 in Crime No.106/2024 to the satisfaction of the learned VI ACMM Court Bengaluru subject to following conditions;

1. The petitioner shall make herself

available for interrogation by the IO as and when required till the final report is filed or until further orders whichever is earlier.

2. The petitioner shall mark her

attendance once in a month preferably the 1st Sunday before the SHO of Mico layout PS, Bengaluru between 10.00 am to 2.00 p.m. till final report or until further orders whichever is earlier.

3. The petitioner shall not cause any Crl.Misc.No.2850/2024

inducement or threats either directly or indirectly to any person acquainted with the facts of the case.

4. The petitioner shall not hamper or

tamper the investigation or to the prosecution witnesses.

5. The petitioner shall not commit similar

offenses.

6. The petitioner shall appear before the

concerned Jurisdictional Magistrate /court as and when directed.

7. The petitioner shall furnish notarized

copies of his residential address with ID proof.

8. The petitioner shall leave the

Bengaluru City without prior permission of the court. Violation of any of the above conditions shall entail in cancellation of the bail. (Typed to my dictation by the Stenographer directly on Computer, corrected by me and then pronounced in open Court on this the 01st Day of July 2024) Digitally signed MOHAMMED byMOINUDDINMOHAMMED MOINUDDIN Date: 2024.07.03 11:19:53 +0530 (MOHAMMED MOINUDDIN) XLV Addl. CC & SJ, Bengaluru. Crl.Misc.No.2850/2024 Order pronounced in the open court vide its separate order O R D E R The petition filed by the petitioner U/S.439 of Cr.P.C. is hereby allowed. (MOHAMMED MOINUDDIN) XLV Addl. CC & SJ, Bengaluru. Crl.Misc.No.2850/2024