NEW DELHI: The Delhi excessive court docket has refused to grant anticipatory bail to a lady accused of working a racket of unlawful sexual actions from her therapeutic massage parlor.
Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta stated that contemplating the grave nature of the, no grounds for anticipatory bail are made out.
The prosecution opposed the bail utility and informed the court docket that one of many staff on the therapeutic massage parlor knowledgeable that she was compelled to make sexual relations with the shoppers by the co-accused within the case in addition to by the current applicant who’s the proprietor of the therapeutic massage parlor.
“Contemplating the proof on file, it seems that a racket of unlawful sexual actions was carried out on the pretext of the therapeutic massage parlor and younger ladies have been induced to increase sexual favors. The identical additionally duly stands supported by the assertion of ‘Ok’ ( witness) recorded beneath Part 161 CrPC… The appliance is accordingly dismissed,” stated the court docket in its order dated June 13.
The applicant argued that she has been falsely accused of working a therapeutic massage parlor illegally with the co-accused and forcing ladies to have sexual relations with the shoppers.
She contended that within the preliminary FIR within the case, no function was alleged to her and it was the co-accused who was alleged to have inappropriately touched the complainant.
The FIR within the case was registered by the Adarsh Nagar police station for the alleged fee of offenses beneath sections 370(Trafficking of particular person)/354-A (Sexual harassment) /509 (Phrase, gesture or act meant to insult the modesty of a lady) /34 (widespread intention) IPC.
The prosecution acknowledged that as per the assertion of the complainant, the co-accused had induced her with a good-looking wage for sexual favors to be offered to the shoppers.
The court docket was knowledgeable that through the investigation, it was revealed that the co-accused was speaking with the applicant to point out the women to the shoppers on video calls.
Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta stated that contemplating the grave nature of the, no grounds for anticipatory bail are made out.
The prosecution opposed the bail utility and informed the court docket that one of many staff on the therapeutic massage parlor knowledgeable that she was compelled to make sexual relations with the shoppers by the co-accused within the case in addition to by the current applicant who’s the proprietor of the therapeutic massage parlor.
“Contemplating the proof on file, it seems that a racket of unlawful sexual actions was carried out on the pretext of the therapeutic massage parlor and younger ladies have been induced to increase sexual favors. The identical additionally duly stands supported by the assertion of ‘Ok’ ( witness) recorded beneath Part 161 CrPC… The appliance is accordingly dismissed,” stated the court docket in its order dated June 13.
The applicant argued that she has been falsely accused of working a therapeutic massage parlor illegally with the co-accused and forcing ladies to have sexual relations with the shoppers.
She contended that within the preliminary FIR within the case, no function was alleged to her and it was the co-accused who was alleged to have inappropriately touched the complainant.
The FIR within the case was registered by the Adarsh Nagar police station for the alleged fee of offenses beneath sections 370(Trafficking of particular person)/354-A (Sexual harassment) /509 (Phrase, gesture or act meant to insult the modesty of a lady) /34 (widespread intention) IPC.
The prosecution acknowledged that as per the assertion of the complainant, the co-accused had induced her with a good-looking wage for sexual favors to be offered to the shoppers.
The court docket was knowledgeable that through the investigation, it was revealed that the co-accused was speaking with the applicant to point out the women to the shoppers on video calls.
,