Latest news with #ImmoralTraffickingAct
Indian Express
30-05-2025
- Indian Express
Ex-BJP minister's son convicted for Ankita Bhandari's murder: case that rocked Uttarakhand
A court in Uttarakhand's Pauri Friday pronounced three accused in the 2020 murder case of Ankita Bhandari guilty. What is the case? On the night of September 18, 2022, Ankita Bhandari, a 19-year-old receptionist at Vanantra Resort in Rishikesh, was killed by three persons, including her employer, Pulkit Arya, son of former BJP leader Vinod Arya. Police said Pulkit had allegedly killed Ankita after she resisted his orders to provide 'special services' to some of the guests at the resort. Her body was found in the Chilla canal on September 24, a day after the trio confessed to killing her. On Friday, Pulkit Arya was found guilty of IPC sections 302 (murder), 201 (concealing evidence), 354A (molestation and outraging the modesty of a woman) and the Immoral Trafficking Act. Other accused Saurabh Bhaskar and Ankit Gupta were charged and convicted under murder, concealing evidence, and the Immoral Trafficking Act. Who was Ankita Bhandari? Bhandari belonged to a poor family in Pauri, who moved to the town for her education. Her father, Birendra Bhandari, worked as a security guard. Though she was enrolled in an institute for hotel management, she had to drop out after a financial setback during Covid. When Bhandari's friend Pushp (later a witness in the murder case) informed her about an opening at a resort in Rishikesh, she decided to take it up and landed the job. A month into the job, she had informed Pushp that the accused were pressuring her to 'provide special services for a VIP' in exchange for Rs 10,000. Pushp informed the court that at 8:32 pm, the deceased last spoke to him and revealed that the accused was with her and she was 'sensing some fear'. The FIR in the case, as quoted in the court, said, 'The accused wanted to speak to the father of the deceased… (and) the deceased was further troubled due to this reason. One morning, the deceased was found missing from the resort. She was not in her room. During the investigation, it was revealed that the accused was molesting the deceased in the resort; they were pressuring her to give extra services to the guest, to which the deceased was not agreeable. The applicant (Ankit Gupta) and the co-accused had a sense of fear that perhaps the deceased might reveal it to others. According to the prosecution, on 18.09.2022, the applicant, along with the co-accused, took the deceased out of the resort, they killed the deceased and pushed her into a canal. The dead body of the deceased was recovered on 24.09.2022.' What was the aftermath? After the case gained attention across the country, the three accused, Pulkit and his associates Saurabh Bhaskar and Ankit Gupta, were taken into custody. At the same time, the district administration demolished a section of the resort, sparking a controversy amid allegations that it was a bid to 'destroy' crucial evidence. Following Pulkit's arrest, the Uttarakhand BJP expelled his father, Vinod, and elder brother from the party. Vinod Arya had enjoyed the rank of a minister of state in the Trivendra Singh Rawat-led BJP government. The night Bhandari was killed, the accused informed the local Patwari (as the area falls under revenue police jurisdiction) about her disappearance, but no case was registered. Patwari Vaibhav Pratap did not inform anyone about the case and went on leave, and after the matter came to light, the case was transferred to the regular police on September 22. Pratap was suspended and later arrested by the Special Investigation Team (SIT) probing the case for negligence and on suspicion of siding with the accused. The incident had raised concerns on the revenue police system in the state, and Assembly Speaker Ritu Khanduri had written to the CM, seeking the replacement of the Revenue police with regular police. In December 2022, a 500-page chargesheet was filed by the prosecution. After the Special Investigation Team (SIT) chargesheet, a petition was filed at the Uttarakhand High Court for the transfer of the case to the CBI. However, the court rejected it, expressing satisfaction with the probe. On Friday morning, Ankita's mother, Soni Devi, broke down and said, 'I request that the accused be hanged… I plead with my sisters that they support her (Ankita's) mother and father…' Her father, Birendra Bhandari, said, 'The way my daughter Ankita Bhandari was murdered by the three men, I have been reiterating – 'death for death'. We hope that all three are sentenced to death. As long as the accused are not hanged, we will have to protest and take to the streets.' He said that in 2023, CM Pushkar Singh Dhami had said that a nursing college would be built in Ankita's name, but this has not happened.
Time of India
28-04-2025
- Time of India
‘Customer can't be prosecuted under immoral trafficking act'
Panaji: A North Goa court ruled that a customer cannot be tried for offences under the Immoral Trafficking Act , and discharged the customer who was apprehended along with an accused who supplied a woman in a prostitution case at Calangute, in a case dating back to 2017. The court held that charges could only be framed against the accused person who procured and supplied the woman, and not against the customer, who was also made an accused. In Nov 2017, the Calangute police charged both the person who supplied the woman and the customer for trafficking under Section 370 of the IPC and under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956. During the raid at a resort at Umta Vaddo, Calangute, the survivor, upon being rescued, stated that she travelled by bus from Mumbai to Goa. When she arrived in Goa, she met the accused, who then took her to meet a customer at the resort, after which the raid took place. The court stated that her statement does not implicate the second accused, who is a customer arranged by the first accused. 'The complaint and panchanama would show that accused no. 1 procured the woman for sexual activities and was living on the earnings of such activities. The statement of the woman does not implicate accused no. 2, except that he was a customer arranged by accused no. 1,' stated North Goa additional sessions judge, Sharmila A Patil .
