In the child trafficking racket for fake adoption, the sessions court, on June 21, granted bail to 10 persons, including a doctor. The court observed that it cannot be said it was “for exploitation of children”.
On April 28, the Mumbai crime branch unit 2 had busted the racket and arrested seven persons, and the accused doctor, Dr Sanjay Khandare. The gang either kidnapped children or got consent of their biological parents with a bribe ranging from Rs80,000 to Rs4 lakh. So far, the police have arrested 35 persons in the case. Of these 18 have been granted bail so far and the rest are still in custody. The crime branch, meanwhile, is preparing to move the Bombay High Court against the bail order.
Granting bail to Dr Khandare, sessions judge VM Pathade said the offence prima facie does not fall under the definition of human trafficking as section 370 includes “exploitation”. The court also raised several questions on the crime branch, saying it’s not clear who the biological parents of these children are, what the role of the accused persons was, and “in what way, when, from where, from whom the physical custody of those children was obtained and then delivered to prospective buyers”.
A crime branch officer said on condition of anonymity, that they had submitted all material concerning their investigation that proves human trafficking as per Indian laws. He said ‘morality’ should be seen differently if the action is going against the law.
A senior police official said, “The so-called agents did not have good intentions when they were sourcing children from financially deprived married couples, who they convinced using greed for money. Even though these children were provided to childless couples for a good future, our law goes against the concept of selling or buying a human being regardless of the reasoning.”
The officer added, “We had submitted a chart specifying the ‘tasks’ of the agents. In the group of agents, one was responsible for sourcing children after enquiring with neighbours and locals, besides arranging a doctor for the delivery. Another agent was given the task to convince the parents using skills and money. The third was responsible for transportation; inter-state or even district level. The next agent managed the childless couple, their demands, and the legality, including paperwork – which included forged documentation, if necessary. These intentions have to be questioned keeping in mind the legal point of view.”
