The Mapusa Fast-Track Sessions Court has rejected the bail application of Punna Hari Prasad, who was arrested by the Crime Branch in connection with an alleged human trafficking and commercial prostitution racket in North Goa.

The court observed that the alleged offences were serious in nature and that releasing the accused at this stage could create a risk of the victim being intimidated. Although the chargesheet has been filed, the trial is yet to begin and key prosecution witnesses, including the victim, are yet to be examined.

According to the prosecution, the Crime Branch received information on July 1, 2026, that the accused was allegedly arranging women for clients in exchange for money. A team comprising police personnel, independent witnesses, an undercover decoy customer and representatives of the NGO ARZ was formed to verify the information.

The decoy customer reportedly contacted the accused through WhatsApp and negotiated a deal for ₹2,000. The accused allegedly agreed to deliver a woman and said he would arrive on a black scooter.

In the early hours of July 2, at around 2.29 am, the accused allegedly arrived at the designated location with the victim. After the decoy handed over the marked cash and the accused indicated the woman, the raiding team moved in, arrested him and rescued the victim.

Seeking bail, the defence argued that the accused was merely working as a driver and had no involvement in the alleged racket. It also questioned the ownership of the scooter and pointed out that the chargesheet had already been filed, arguing that further custody was unnecessary.

The prosecution opposed the application, alleging that the accused was involved in procuring women from different states for sexual exploitation and feared that his release could lead to witness intimidation, tampering with evidence or a resumption of the alleged illegal activity.

After examining the records, including the victim's statements, the court noted material indicating alleged inducement into sexual exploitation for commercial gain. It also stressed the need to protect the victim and ensure that witnesses could testify without fear.

Dismissing the bail plea, the court held that the seriousness of the allegations, the vulnerability of the victim and the possibility of witness intimidation weighed against granting bail at this stage. The allegations remain subject to determination during trial.