Read Time: 05 minutes
The additional public prosecutor argued that the medical report of the minor was awaited and pointed out that details regarding the money paid had been provided by the accused. He asserted that there was evidence against the applicant
The Bombay High Court has recently observed that people belonging to the LGBTQ+ community are especially vulnerable within the confines of jail.
"This Court is of the opinion that a person belonging to the LGBTQ+ community, who is also HIV positive, can be said to be a person belonging to a category of persons, whor are indeed vulnerable, particularly within the four corners of a jail," the court said.
A single judge bench of the Bombay High Court comprising Justice Manish Pitale was hearing a bail application filed by a person belonging to the LGBTQ+ community who was booked for human trafficking.
The complainant in the case was a sub-inspector who filed an FIR after the parents of a 1-year-7-month-old child approached the police with a grievance regarding the child.
The parents were also arraigned as accused in the case. The statement revealed that the parents, in need of money, allowed the minor to go for film shoots. Three other people, to whom the minor was sent for shooting, were also arraigned as accused.
One of these three people informed the bench that since the parents needed money, they decided to sell the child for Rs. 4.5 lakhs and handed possession of the child to the present applicant.
The counsel representing the applicant argued that the applicant was not involved in any financial transaction and only took possession of the child along with his partner. He emphasized that under Indian law, neither he nor his partner were permitted to adopt.
Furthermore, the counsel highlighted that the applicant belongs to the LGBTQ+ community, which is vulnerable, and that the applicant is HIV positive.
The additional public prosecutor argued that the medical report of the minor was awaited and pointed out that details regarding the money paid had been provided by the accused. He asserted that there was evidence against the applicant.
The court rejected the applicant's argument regarding the absence of a financial transaction, emphasizing that Section 370 of the IPC encompasses actions such as transferring, harbouring, and inducing.
However, while granting bail, the court took note of the fact that the applicant had no prior criminal record and had already spent over a month in jail.
Please Login or Register
