Child trafficking accused bail denied – Court denies bail to child trafficking accused: Crime against humanity

The Nagpur bench of the Bombay High Court, rejected the bail application of an accused in a child trafficking case where an eight-month-old child was taken away from his house and sold to a childless couple for Rs 2.5 lakhs.

The bench of Justice Urmila Joshi-Phalke emphasised the serious nature of the crime and said, “The allegation against the applicant is trafficking of human which is a heinous offence. It is a crime against humanity resulting in human rights violations. While considering the bail application, as far as the involvement of the applicant in human trafficking is concerned, the court must take into account the fundamental rights of the victim not to be trafficked.”

The case stems from a complaint filed in November 2022 by one Rajkumari Raju Nishad, who alleged that her eight-month-old child was abducted by the accused. Investigations revealed that the transaction occurred at the applicant Badal Dhanraj Madke’s house, where several accused were present, purportedly under the guise of facilitating adoption.

The prosecution represented by DV Chauhan, argued that Madke played a critical role by locating buyers for the abducted child and benefiting financially from the sale.

The court noted that such actions constitute a heinous offense against humanity, involving gross violations of fundamental rights.

The ground taken by Madke for the bail was that trial against him was kept in abeyance and the trial was delayed due to the involvement of other co-accused, who face charges under the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act (MCOCA).

However, the court said that the delay alone does not justify bail, especially in cases involving severe offenses such as human trafficking. Chauhan too assured the court that the trial against Madke would be expedited.

Citing precedents, the court affirmed that a trial under MCOCA should take precedence but stressed the importance of expediting the proceedings against Madke. The court also reiterated the constitutional mandate for a speedy trial, directing the lower court to avoid unnecessary delays.

Given the gravity of the allegations and the applicant’s criminal history, which includes 12 prior cases, the court deemed him unfit for release. The application for bail was dismissed.