HONOURABLE JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI
CRIMINAL PETITION No. 3611 of 2021
ORDER:
1. This Criminal Petition is filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of the proceedings in Crime No.185 of 2021 of Madhapur (Guttala) Police Station, Cyberabad.
2. The brief facts which led to filing of the present Criminal Petition are that the above crime was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 370-A (2) and 188 of I.P.C. and Sections 3 to 5 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, with an allegation that on 20.02.2021 at about 20.00 hours, on credible information that organized prostitution is going on at Studio 11, H.No.1- 96/8/13, Techno Polosis building, 1st floor, Opp: Image Hospital, Arunodaya Colony, Madhapur, the Sub-Inspector of Police, Madhapur, after obtaining permission from the concerned authority, proceeded to the said place, along with staff and witnesses and on search, found some persons in the cabin. On enquiry, they revealed that the owner and organizer by name Syed Ismail of the Spa knowingly hired/engaged them for physical and sexual exploitation by force and indulging to give payments and five persons, who are the customers, were came for sexual enjoyment by paying an amount. A-1, who is the organizer and owner of the spa, and A-2 to A-6, who are the customers, were red-handedly caught by the police and seized 14 mobile phones, 09 condom packets and net cash of Rs.9,140/- from their possession. After following the procedure prescribed, the police registered a 2 case in Crime No.1285 of 2021 for the offences punishable under Sections 370(A) (2) and 188 of I.P.C. and Sections 3, 4 and 5 of Prevention of Immoral Traffic Act.
3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner/accused No.5 submits that even accepting the allegations in the charge sheet to be true, the petitioner/accused No.5 is only a customer and not an organizer of brothel house. He further submits that Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act would not be attracted to the customers, who were present at the venue, where the alleged brothel house has been running. Hence, the proceedings against the petitioner are liable to be quashed.
5. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor would submit that petitioner/accused No.5 is liable for charge under Section 370A I.P.C and prayed to dismiss the petition.
6. An identical issue came up for consideration before this Court in S.Naveen Kumar v. The State of Telangana1 wherein this Court, while quashing the proceedings against the customer under Section 4 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, directed the Magistrate to take cognizance under Section 370-A IPC against the customer.
1 (2015) 2 ALD (Crl.) 156 (AP) 3
7. Before proceeding further, it would be useful to refer to Section 370-A of I.P.C. which reads as under:
"370-A. Exploitation of a trafficked person.--(1) Whoever, knowingly or having reason to believe that a minor has been trafficked, engages such minor for sexual exploitation in any manner, shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than five years, but which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.
(2) Whoever, knowingly by or having reason to believe that a person has been trafficked, engages such person for sexual exploitation in any manner, shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than three years, but which may extend to five years, and shall also be liable to fine."
8. Here, the petitioner/accused No.5 was not the person, who trafficked any person, for any of the purposes referred to above, but he was only a customer. Therefore, he is liable to be prosecuted for the offence punishable under Section 370-A (2) of I.P.C.
9. In view of the judgment referred to above and having regard to the fact that the petitioner/accused No.5 is only a customer, the proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.5 for the offences punishable under Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act are liable to be quashed while permitting the Magistrate concerned to proceed further against the petitioner/accused No.5 for the offence punishable under Section 370-A (2) of I.P.C.
4
10. In the result, the Criminal Petition is allowed in part. The proceedings against the petitioner/accused No.5 in Crime No.185 of 2021 of Madhapur (Guttala) Police Station, Cyberabad, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act only are hereby quashed while permitting the Investigating Authority concerned to proceed further against the petitioner/A-5 for the offence punishable under Section 370-A (2) of I.P.C.
11. As a sequel thereto, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending in this Criminal Petition, shall stand closed.
________________ JUSTICE G. SRI DEVI 30.04.2021 gkv 5