In a bail application filed before the Madhya Pradesh High Court under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) regarding a crime registered for offences punishable under Sections 143(4) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 as well as Section 81 of the Juvenile Justice (Care & Protection of Children) Act, 2015, a Single Judge Bench of Justice Gajendra Singh granted bail to the applicant.
A woman having two children, became pregnant for a third time but was not willing to continue the pregnancy due to financial constraints, and approached a doctor for medical termination of the pregnancy. However, considering her poor health, the doctor refused to do so. Upon seeing her distress a lady approached her and suggested her to continue the pregnancy as she would arrange a suitable family for the adoption of the child after birth.
On 31-03-2026, the woman delivered a female child in a private hospital, as suggested by the said lady. After the woman was discharged, the said lady took the newborn baby and assured her that the child would be given in adoption to a respectable and deserving family. The lady also took the woman’s signature on a blank paper on the pretext of completing the adoption formalities. After 2-3 days went by without any information, the woman became suspicious and demanded for her child to be returned.
The lady informed the birth mother that the child had already been handed over to the applicant and her daughter. The mother complained to the police and it was alleged that the said lady had sold her newborn baby to the present applicant for monetary consideration. The trial court rejected the applicant’s bail application primarily on the ground that the birth mother, in her statement, alleged that the applicant was a prostitute and it was observed that there were sufficient grounds to attract the offence of trafficking under Section 143 of the BNS.
The Court perused the material and noted that the child was arranged for the applicant’s daughter as she had no children of her own. It was found that the essential ingredients of the expression ‘exploitation’ as defined in Explanation 1 apprehended to Section 143 of BNS were not attracted to the facts of the present case and that the proviso to Section 81 was also not applicable.
Thus, the Court allowed the application and directed the applicant to be released upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 50,000/- with one solvent surety. Lastly, the applicant was also directed to comply with the provisions of Section 480(3) of BNSS.
ALSO READ: SBI Liable to Pay Interest on Fixed Deposit During Interregnum Period: Kerala HC
