Order
.. 1 ..

Bail Application No. 1185/2022
CNR No. MHCC02-006590-2022
IN THE COURT OF SESSION FOR GREATER BOMBAY AT MUMBAI
BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1185 OF 2022
IN
REMAND APPLICATION NO. 668 OF 2022
Mrs. Shraddha Yogesh Sarang,
Aged about 33 years, Occ.:Service,
Indian Inhabitant of Mumbai,
Residing at Room No. 1, Dahibawkar
Compound, Siddhi Vinayak Chawl,
S. V. Road, Near Jai Ambe Mata Mandir,
Ketkipada, Dahisar (East),
Mumbai-400 068.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Applicant/Accused
)
)
)
Respdt./Complainant
Versus.
The State of Maharashtra
(At the instance of Worli Police Station,
Mumbai vide C. R. No. 449/2022).

Appearances :
Mr. Keshav D. Shetye, Ld. Adv. for the applicant/accused.
Mrs. Kalpana Hire, Ld. A.P.P. for the State/Respondent/Complainant.

CORAM:
H.H. THE ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE,
SMT. A. B. SHARMA,
(C. R. No. 39).
DATED:
9th June, 2022.

..2..

:ORAL ORDER:
The applicant/original accused Mrs. Shraddha Yogesh
Sarang has filed the present application under Section 439 of the Code
of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“the Cr.P.C.” for short) for releasing her on
bail, for the offence punishable under Sections 370(3) r/w 34 of the
Indian Penal Code, 1860 and under Sections 4 & 5 of the Immoral
Trafficking (Prevention) Act, 1956 registered with Worli Police Station,
Mumbai.
2.

As per FIR, on 11/05/2022, P.I. Anita Kadam received secret
information that the prostitution is going on at Aruza Spa, 2/A, New
Sagar Vihar Housing Society, Sea-face, Worli.

Therefore, after
confirmation of the news from the bogus customer, the raid was
effected. That time, 6 currency notes of Rs. 500/- denomination, which
were given by the bogus customer to the victim, was recovered from her.
On enquiry, she disclosed that she and other girls are forced to do
prostitution under the garb of massage and manager and owner of the
Spa are retaining part of the consideration amount. That time, three
victims were rescued from the spot. Therefore, the offence came to be
registered against the applicant/accused and other co-accused.
3.

The
grounds
on
which
bail
is
sought
by
the
applicant/accused are that, she has no concerned with the alleged
offence. She was working as a ‘Receptionist’ at Arujha Beauty Parlor and
Spa. It is further contended that the applicant/accused used to ask for
details of the customer about what they want to do i.e. Menicure,
Pedicure, Massage, etc. and thereafter, sent the client to the particular
staff, who are related for the particular services towards the customer. It
is also contended that the applicant/accused was unaware whatever the
incident happened between the customer and the lady worker in the
..3..
Massage Room. Prior pandemic situation, she was working in a Pharma
Company, but due to Lock-down, she became jobless and thus, started
working as a ‘Receptionist’ in the Spa. Therefore, no offence is made out
against her. The applicant/accused has further contended that she is
having two minor children and they are totally dependent upon her. In
the result, the applicant/accused prays to release her on bail by allowing
this application.
4.

Heard
Ld.

Advocate
appearing
on
behalf
of
the
applicant/accused and Ld. A.P.P. for the State/Complainant. Perused the
application, Say of the Investigating Officer at Exh-2 and the case-diary.
5.

The prosecution by its Say has submitted that search of the
co-accused is going on. The statements of the victims are yet to be
recorded. The investigation is in progress. If the applicant/accused is
released on bail, she may put pressure on the victims and also she may
abscond and thus, objected the bail application of applicant/accused.
6.

The Say filed by the prosecution and the argument
advanced before me indicate that all the victims rescued are major. It is
submitted on behalf of the applicant/accused that the victims are giving
massage and other services to the customers willingly.

The remand
papers annexed with the application, go to show that the victims were
kept in safe custody at the rescue foundation, Kandiwali. The applicant/
accused is having two minor sons and she was arrested on 12/05/2022
and since then she is behind the bar. The case diary goes to show that
the material part of the investigation is already over. Therefore, longer
detention of the applicant/accused not seems to be required.
7.

Considering facts and circumstances, it will be just and
..4..
proper, in the interest of justice, to release the applicant/accused on bail
by imposing certain conditions. Hence, I proceed to pass the following
order :-
ORDER
1.
Bail
Application
No.
1185/2022
filed
by
applicant/original accused Mrs. Shraddha Yogesh Sarang in Remand
Application No. 668/2022 (C. R. No. 449/2022) is hereby allowed.
2.
The applicant/accused shall be released on her executing
PB and SB of Rs. 25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-five Thousand Only), with
one or more sureties in the like amount.
3.
The applicant/accused shall furnish her mobile/landline
number, the mobile/landline numbers of her two close
relatives/friends and her family members, who are residing preferably
in Mumbai, along with their residential proofs to the concerned police
station and shall not change her contact details till conclusion of trial.
4.
The applicant/accused shall also produce the proof of her
identity and proof of residence, at the time of executing bail bond.
5.
The applicant/accused shall not contact the informant
and prosecution witnesses in any manner and will not tamper with
the prosecution evidence. She shall not enter the local jurisdiction of
Worli Police Station till the completion of investigation.
6.
The applicant/accused shall co-operate with the police
during investigation. She shall attend the concerned police station
once within 15 days in between 10.00 a.m. to 12.00 noon, till filing of
the charge-sheet.
7.
The applicant/accused shall not leave India without prior
permission of the Court.
8.
on bail.

The applicant/accused shall not commit any offence while
9.
Ld. Advocate for the applicant/accused is directed to
inform the above conditions to the applicant/accused for compliance.
10.
In case of breach/default of any of the above condition by
the applicant/accused, it would be viewed seriously and it would
entail cancellation of bail granted to the applicant/accused.
11.
Bail
Application
No.
1185/2022
filed
by
applicant/original accused Mrs. Shraddha Yogesh Sarang in Remand
..5..
Application No. 668/2022 (C. R. No. 449/2022) stands disposed of
accordingly.

(Order dictated and pronounced in open Court.)

Date:-09/06/2022
Dictated on
Transcribed on
Signed on
Sent to Dept. on
:
:
:
:
(A. B. SHARMA)
The Additional Sessions Judge,
City Sessions Court for Gr. Bombay at Mumbai.

09/06/2022
10/06/2022
10/06/2022
..6..

CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER
10/06/2022 at 6:00 p.m.
UPLOADED DATE AND TIME
Gitalaxmi R. Mohite
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge
(With Court Room No.

H.H.J. Smt. A. B. Sharma
(Court Room No. 39)
)
Date
of
Pronouncement
Judgment/Order
of 09/06/2022
Judgment/Order signed by P.O. on
10/06/2022
Judgment/Order uploaded on
10/06/2022