Judgment : This appeal was directed against the order of conviction passed by Additional Sessions Judge, 4th Court, Alipore under Section 366 read with Sections 5 and 6 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act. 2. Shortly put the petitioner's case is that accused Marjina Bibi took Rupa Mondal to Bombay' assuring her to give job as main servant from Canning on 17.01.2007 but instead of giving her any job Marjina Bibi sold Rupa to a prostitute quarter and when Rupa did not give consent to this immoral job then she and her minor son were assaulted and tortured and compelled her to carryon the work of prostitution. One day she fled away and lodged a complaint on the basis of the complaint police took up investigation of this case and submitted charge-sheet against Marjina Bibi under Sections 366 and 5 and 6 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act. Hence the prosecution case. 3. The defence case as it appears from the trend of the cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses and the answer given by the accused person to her examination under Section 313, Cr.P.C. is that of absolute innocence. 4. From the side of prosecution in order to bring home the charge leveled against Marjina Bibi eight witnesses were examined including Rupa Mondal as P.W. 1. P.W. 2 Manoj Naskar, P.W. 3 Sandhya Naskar happens to be the parents of Rupa. P.W. 4 Gita Biswas has been declared hostile by the prosecution and remain unshaken during the course of the cross examination and her oral testimony did not help the prosecution case in any way. P.W. 5 Sumitra Roy, worker of Garanbose Gram Bikash Kendra under Canning P.S. It is a drafted complaint as per the instruction of Rupa and read over and explained the same to Rupa and thereafter signed on it. Admittedly Sumitra Roy (P.W. 5) has no knowledge about the alleged incident only she drafted the petition of compliant. Jhuma Hari was examined as P.W. 6 she went to Bombay alongwith Rupa and on the V.T. Station she was detained by the T.T.E. as she was travelling within ticket and police send her back to the home. She contended that she cannot say whether Rupa has gone alongwith Marjina. Jhuma Hari was examined as P.W. 6 she went to Bombay alongwith Rupa and on the V.T. Station she was detained by the T.T.E. as she was travelling within ticket and police send her back to the home. She contended that she cannot say whether Rupa has gone alongwith Marjina. During the course of the cross-examination Jhuma Hari contended that she is not stated anything to police but it was her admission that she went to Bombay along with Rupa with Marjina Bibi. Gobinda Kundu was examined as P.W. 7 and he was a police A.S.I, attached to Usthi P.S. He received the complaint and as per direction of O.C. endorsed the same and the case was handed over to S.I. K. Debnath for investigation. So, it is needless to mention that P.W. 7 is also a formal witness. P.W. 8 Pradip Kr. Chakraborty was the I.O. of this case. These eight witnesses examined from the prosecution side. Though P.W. 4 as I discussed earlier has not stated anything against the accused. P.W. 5 Sumitra Roy is a formal witness. P.W. 2 Jhuma Hari accompanied with Rupa to Bombay but she was detained by the T.T.E. sent back to West Bengal and she frankly admitted that it was unable for her to state whether Rupa went with Marjina but she admitted that during the course of the cross examination that Rupa went to Bombay alongwith Marjia P.W. 7 as I pointed out as a formal witness. P.W. 8 Pradip Chakraborty is the I.O. of this case. In view of aforesaid discussion it is crystal clear that the entire prosecution case depends upon the ocular version of P.W. 1 - P.W. 3 and to some extent Jhuma Hari who is examined as P.W. 6. According to Rupa (P.W. 1) she was married and Marjina a resident of Canning came to her for a job of maid servant in Kolkata with a lucrative salary. Rupa was accompanied by Jhuma Hari and all of them went to Bombay as per advice of Marjina where Jhuma was detained at V.T. Station and send back to Kolkata. Rupa escaped with Marjina and went to a prostitute area. Marjina took Rupa and her son in a house at Bombay and engaged her in immoral work. Rupa protested as a result she was mercilessly beaten by Marjina Bibi. Rupa escaped with Marjina and went to a prostitute area. Marjina took Rupa and her son in a house at Bombay and engaged her in immoral work. Rupa protested as a result she was mercilessly beaten by Marjina Bibi. The ocular version of Rupa she duly corroborated by her parents and Jhuma. After perusal of entire evidence on record I am of the opinion that prosecution has been able to prove the charge beyond all reasonable doubt. It was needless to mention that there are minor discrepancies here and there but that does not damage the entire prosecution story. Furthermore, it is very vital in this case as I analyze that Rupa and her parents were cross-examined at length by the learned Lawyer for the defence but could not restrict anything from them and they remain unshaken during the course of the cross-examination which proves the prosecution case to the point. 5. It is a fact that Marjina took Rupa to Bomaby and compelled her to the act of prostitution which is a heinous crime and I think that there is nothing on record to release Marjina only on some minor discrepancies in the evidence and on the ground that first I.O. was not examined. 6. It is submitted by the learned Lawyer appearing for Marjina Bibi that she was already served the sentence. Though the order of conviction was passed in the year 17.09.2009 so only three years have passed. I failed to understand how Marjina Bibi completed her sentences as awarded by the learned trial Court. 7. However, on perusal of the evidence on record I do not find anything to allow the appeal and appeal stands dismissed on contest with cost. So far the version of the learned Lawyer for the defence is concerned learned C.J.M., Alipore is hereby directed to obtain a report from the correctional home or learned State Advocate is hereby requested to collect the report from the correctional home regarding the quantum of punishment and the authenticacy of the letter written by Marjina Bibi and thereafter learned C.J.M. is hereby directed to pass order in accordance with the law. 8. As prayed for by the complainant, the lower Court record along with the judgement be sent down to the court below immediately at the cost of the appellant. Such cost to be deposited by the appellant by 28.09.2012. 8. As prayed for by the complainant, the lower Court record along with the judgement be sent down to the court below immediately at the cost of the appellant. Such cost to be deposited by the appellant by 28.09.2012. Urgent photostat certified copy, if applied for, be handed over to the parties as early as possible.