LAKHAN RAJENDRA BHANGEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

                                 1                     946ba1321.26



        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                    BENCH AT AURANGABAD

               946 BAIL APPLICATION NO. 1321 OF 2026

                     LAKHAN RAJENDRA BHANGE
                                VERSUS
                    THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
                                   ...
Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Sandanshiv Milind B. & Mr. Chandrakant T.
                                 Kadam
              APP for Respondents/State : Mr. S.V. Hange
                                   ...



                          CORAM : HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.
                           DATE      : 19.08.2026

PER COURT :


1.          The applicant seeks regular bail under Section 483 of the

BNSS, in connection with Crime No. 501 of 2026, registered with Newasa

Police Station, District Ahilyanagar for the offences punishable under

Section 143(3) of the BNS alongwith Section 3, 4, 5, 7 and 8 of the

Prevention of Immoral Traffic Act, 1956.



2.          Perusal of the FIR suggest that the offence was registered on

12.06.2026 and on the same date the applicant came to be arrested and

since then he is continuous to be in custody.



3.          The prosecution case emerges from the source information

allegedly received by the Police Inspector, Newasa Police Station stating

that the activities of the prosecution were being carried out on the
                                2                      946ba1321.26



establishment, which is owned and possessed by the present applicant

under the name Shri Hotel and Lodging at Handi Nimgaon, Taluka

Newasa, District Ahilyanagar. Acting upon the said information the

police secured the presence of two panch witnesses and arranged the

raid operation.   Two currency notes of the denomination of Rs. 500/-

each were handed over to one of the pancha customer, with instructions

that he shall visit the shop and asked for the company of woman and

after arrangement is made predetermined signal shall be given to the

police party, who are standing outside the hotel, from the window of

room allotted to him.    According to the prosecution, upon receiving

signal, the raiding party entered the hotel and also in the adjoining

lodging premises. Two co-accused persons were found in the hotel area,

who disclosed themselves as they are working in the said establishment

and also informed that the present applicant is the owner and he is

managing the affairs of the hotel and lodging. It is further alleged that

the applicant was found inside the lodging premises and when his

personal search was taken, the said two currency notes of the

denomination of Rs. 500/-, which were handed over to the pancha

customer were recovered from his possession. When the premises of the

lodging was inspected, one woman was found in a room, while second

women was found in a separate room with the pancha customer. There

were other material articles which were lying in the room alongwith

mobile phones which were seized by the Police.
                                 3                     946ba1321.26



4.          The learned Advocate appearing for the applicant submits

that the applicant is a young man aged about 25 years with no criminal

antecedents. He argued that he had started business recently and he

was not indulged in running any prostitution business and/or

conducting the hotel business as brothel. In fact, he submitted that the

applicant’s family runs a small hotel at the road side and it is not a

lodging which is being operated by the applicant.



5.          The learned Advocate for the applicant also relied upon the

registration certificate issued under the Food, Safety and Standards Act,

2006. It was fairly brought to the notice of the Court by the learned APP

that the said certificate is in the name of applicant’s father namely

Rajendra Bange and not in the name of the present applicant. However,

the learned Advocate for the applicant submitted that said certificate

supports the contention of the applicant that the establishment was

intended and registered as food business. He further argued that both

the women who are terminated as victim are adult, and therefore, they

were present in the premises on their own wish and will. The learned

Advocate for the applicant submits that all the articles which were found

lying in the premises are seized. The statements of witnesses are

recorded and the documents concerning the ownership of the premises

and control of the establishment are also collected. He further submits

that the entire investigation is almost complete and the charge-sheet is

likely to be filed at any moment.      He, therefore, submits that the
                                   4                   946ba1321.26



applicant who has been arrested on 12.06.2026 does not deserve to

continue in custody and prayed for allowing the application and

releasing the applicant on bail.



6.          The learned APP for the respondent State opposes the

application. He submits that the applicant is not merely an employed

person and independently was found present at the establishment. He

submits that being the owner of the premises he is also the person who

is controlling the entire affairs of that premises. The seized currency

notes are recovered from the person of the applicant, which attributes

him a specific role of involvement in the alleged offence. In addition to

that he submits that the statements of the victim women also attributes

a specific role, wherein, the allegations are that the women victims were

posed in the prosecution by the present applicant. He further argues

that the offences under Section 143(3) of the BNS prescribes rigorous

imprisonment for a term of 10 years, which may extend to imprisonment

for life.



7.          I have heard both the learned Advocates and also perused

the documents which have placed on record by the applicant as well as

the Investigation papers produced before this Court by the learned APP.



8.          No doubt, the Court is convinced that the accusations are

serious in nature under Section 143(3) of the BNS and provides
                                5                      946ba1321.26



substantive sentence.   The statements of women and the recovery of

prerecorded notes from the applicant constitute the material which

cannot be discarded while considering this application. At the same time,

as far as the severity of the offence is concerned, it is an important

consideration, but it cannot be a sole ground for continuation of

detention of the applicant and the Court must also consider the role

attributed to the applicant with the nature of the accusations at the

stage of the investigation. The necessity of the further custodial

interrogation of the applicant alongwith possibility that he may indulge

in any activity of tampering or hampering the evidence cannot be ruled

out.



9.          The material placed before the Court indicates that the raid

was conducted on 12.06.2026, the applicant was arrested on the same

date and was initially remanded to the police custody and subsequently

has been taken in custody. The prosecution states that the statements

of both the women and the other witnesses have also been recorded. The

mobile phone and other articles which were found in the lodging

premises as well as in the hotel premises are also seized.            The

documents pertaining to the ownership of the present applicant, along

with necessary certificates required for functioning the hotel or lodging

business are also recovered and collected. The learned APP, upon

instructions, also submits that the investigation is almost complete and

for completion of the remaining investigation, substantial material is
                                  6                      946ba1321.26



required to be recovered from the applicant.


10.         Thus, the case is predominantly based upon the trap

proceedings. The recovery is already effected. The statements are already

have been recorded and the documents are already have been seized and

collected. Thus, the prosecution has not pointed out that any particular

recovery is remained to be effected from the applicant or any specific

aspect for which the continuation of the custody of the present applicant

is necessary. The statements of two women victim no doubt require due

consideration, however, both the women victims are adult, and therefore,

the physical confinement of those women in the premises along with

precise circumstances in which they alleged to have come to the

establishment, the nature of the alleged inducement or on compulsion

both of them have to be indulged in the prostitution and therefore,

alongwith ingredients of Section 143 of the BNS it will have to be

determined upon appreciation of the evidence at the time of trial and no

final conclusion in that regard is warranted at this stage.



11.         The arguments of the learned APP pertaining to the

registration certificate under the Food, Safety and Standards Act, 2006

not being issued in the name of the present applicant but standing in the

name of the father of the applicant can also be a matter for a separate

action.



12.         Coupled with the aforesaid facts and circumstances and two
                                  7                      946ba1321.26



co-accused have already been released on bail by the learned Sessions

Court, though the role of the present applicant is not identical for the

reason that two co-accused are the employees of the applicant and the

present applicant is the owner and thus, it requires for the present

applicant to manage the entire establishment, the applicant therefore,

cannot be released on parity but considering that the co-accused have

already been released on bail and this can also be kept the basis for

releasing the present applicant on bail. Hence the following order :

                                  ORDER

         (i)    The Bail Application is allowed.

         (ii)   The applicant Lakhan s/o Rajendra Bhange shall be
         released on bail in Crime No. 501 of 2026 registered with
         Newasa Police Station, District Ahilyanagar, for the offences
         punishable under Sections 143(3) of the Bharatiya Nyaya
         Sanhita, 2023 and under Sections 3, 4, 5, 7 and 8 of the
         Prevention of Immoral Traffic Act, on furnishing a personal
         bond of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with one
         solvent surety in the like amount, subject to the following
         conditions :

                a)    The applicant shall attend the police station till
                framing of the charge as and when called by the
                concerned     Investigating    Officer, unless    their
                attendance is specifically exempted.

                b)    The applicant shall not, directly or indirectly,
                contact, threaten, induce or influence the informant or
                any prosecution witness and shall not tamper with the
                prosecution evidence.

                c)    The applicant shall furnish his current
                residential addresses and mobile numbers to the
                               8                       946ba1321.26



             Investigating Officer and the trial Court within seven
             days of release, intimate any change forthwith, and
             attend the Investigating Officer upon prior written
             notice if further investigation is required.

             d)    The applicant shall not leave India without prior
             permission of the trial Court and, if he possess
             passports, shall deposit the same with the trial Court
             within seven days of his release.

             e)    The applicant shall not involve himself in any
             offence of a similar nature while on bail.

             f)     Breach of any of the above conditions shall
             entitle the prosecution to apply for cancellation of bail.

             g)     All observations in this order are prima facie and
             confined to the decision of this bail application. The
             trial Court shall decide the case independently on the
             evidence led before it.

             h)    The Bail Application is disposed of in the above
             terms.




                                   (HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.)




mahajansb/