Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010213782025 2025:GAU-AS:13501 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Bail Appln./3124/2025 BINITA DAS D/O LATE LAKHI KT. DAS RESIDENT OF HOUSE NO. 133, GANESHPARA, P.O. - BAMUNIMAIDAM, P,S. - CHANDMARI, DIST. - KAMRUP(M),ASSAM, PIN-781003 VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. K M HASSAN, Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 26.09.2025 1. Heard Mr. K.M. Hassan, the learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam. Page No.# 2/4 2. This application under Section 483 of the BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioner, namely, Binita Das, who has been detained behind the bars since 10.08.2025 in connection with Dispur P.S. Case No. 669/2025, under Sections 143(3)/144(2) of the BNS read with Section 5 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 09.08.2025, one Karabi Saikia, SI of Police, had lodged an FIR before the Officer-In-Charge of Dispur Police Station, inter alia, alleging that on receipt of an information through reliable sources that a sex racket is being run in a beauty parlour located at Ganeshguri, under the name and style “LOOKS PARLOUR”. A raid was conducted in the said beauty parlour and during raid, the 3(three) numbers of victim girls were rescued therefrom and 3(three) accused persons, including the present petitioner were arrested. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been languishing behind the bars for the last 47 days. He also submits that the petitioner never forced the victim girls to indulge in immoral activities. 5. He further submits that as all the victim girls are major and therefore, they cannot be compelled to indulge in immoral activities. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner also submits that the petitioner is the mother of 2(two) children and in her absence, nobody is there to look after the children of the petitioner. 7. He further submits that the petitioner is ready to co-operate in the investigation. Page No.# 3/4 8. On the other hand, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has produced the Case Diary of Dispur P.S. Case No. 669/2025, and has submitted that the victim girls has implicated the petitioner in their statement made during the course of the investigation. 9. Considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for both sides and has gone through the Case Diary. Though it appears that there are incriminating materials against the petitioner in the Case Diary, however, the investigation has fairly progressed. 10. Moreover, considering the period of detention undergone by the petitioner (47 days), this Court is of the considered opinion that if the petitioner co-operates in the investigation, her further custodial detention may not be required for fair completion of the investigation of Dispur P.S. Case No. 669/2025. 11. In view of the above, the above-named petitioner is allowed to go on bail of Rs. 30,000/-(Rupees Thirty Thousand only) with a suitable surety of like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kamrup (M) with following conditions that:- (i) the petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Police Officer as and when called for and shall co-operate with the investigation; and (ii) the petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to the informant or to any other person who may be acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade such person from disclosing such facts before the Investigating Officer or to any Court. Page No.# 4/4 12. Send back the Case Diary. 13. With the above observations, this bail application is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant