Site icon SCC Times

HP HC | Petitioner who is a pimp cannot claim bail on ground of parity citing judgments where bail was granted subject to its peculiar facts

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Himachal Pradesh High Court: Anoop Chitkara, J., dismissed the bail petition with the liberty to file a new bail application more particularly after the statement of the victim is recorded.

The facts of the case are such that the petitioner is a woman aged 32 years on the allegations of indulging a minor girl aged 16 years into flesh trade with strangers, and now incarcerating since 3-1-2021 has come up before this Court seeking regular bail. FIR has been filed under Sections 376, 370, 506, 511, 34 of Penal Code, 1860 i.e.  IPC and Sections 6, 17 & 18 of the POCSO Act and Sections 3, 4 & 5 of Immoral Trafficking Act. A previous bail application was filed and thereby was dismissed as withdrawn.

The Court after adverting to the facts and submissions observed that simply because the victim was unaware or she at that point of time did not choose to inform the police would not make out a case for bail to the petitioner on this ground. The reasons for the victim to run away from her home are very tragic and there was none to take care of her.

The Court observed “The society as well as the State failed to take responsibilities in such type of cases. The petitioner after interacting with the victim realized that she is vulnerable and took advantage of her and allegedly forced her to do sex for money. Thus this is not at all a ground for bail.”

The petitioner relied on two judgments where bail was granted to co-accused and demanded bail on parity. The Court observed that a perusal of such clearly mentions that the bail in both the above bail petitions was granted on the facts and circumstances peculiar to the petitioner(s) and it was not a ground of parity. 

The Court held “Prima facie the allegations point out towards the petitioner, who is the main accused. She acted like a pimp and such type of persons are not entitled to any bail.”

[Renu Devi v. State of HP, 2021 SCC OnLine HP 5343, decided on 14-07-2021]


Appearances:

For the petitioner: Mr Karan Singh Kanwar

For the respondent: Mr Nand Lal Thakur and Mr Ram Lal Thakur


Arunima Bose, Editorial Assistant has reported this brief.

Exit mobile version