Allahabad High Court
Ankur Kumar @ Ankur Chaudhary vs State Of U.P. And Another on 1 October, 2024
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:160872
Court No. - 80
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 26945 of 2024
Applicant :- Ankur Kumar @ Ankur Chaudhary
Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Mohit Singh,Ravi Kumar Singh
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Vinod Diwakar,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent, and perused the record.
2. The instant application has been preferred with the prayer to quash the charge sheet dated 15.08.2023 and the cognizance/summoning order dated 22.12.2023 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad, along with the entire proceedings of Case No. 70124 of 2023, titled as State v. Ankur Chaudhary, arising from Case Crime No. 928 of 2023, under Section 5 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956, registered at Police Station Indirapuram, District Ghaziabad.
3. The prosecution's case is that, acting on secret information, on 09.07.2023, Chowki In-charge Nitikhand raided New Relex Point Spa Centre and found individuals engaged in prostitution. Women were allegedly enticed into prostitution, and the applicant was found in a compromising position inside the spa. The police seized aphrodisiac substances, and based on these allegations, the impugned FIR was registered against the spa's owner and the applicant. Subsequently, a charge sheet was filed, and the Magistrate took cognizance. Aggrieved by the cognizance order, the applicant has approached this court seeking the quashing of the proceedings.
4. The applicant's counsel primarily argues that the applicant was neither the owner of the spa nor involved in enticing women into prostitution. At most, the applicant was a consumer who had paid for services and was found engaged in consensual intimacy with one of the women at the spa. He submits that no specific allegations against the applicant attract the ingredients of Section 5 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act.
5. Section 5 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, is reproduced below:
"5. Procuring, inducing or taking woman or girl for the sake of prostitution.
(1) Any person who-
(a) procures or attempts to procure a woman or girl, whether with or without her consent, for the purpose of prostitution; or
(b) induces a woman or girl to go from any place, with the intent that she may for the purpose of prostitution become the inmate of, or frequent, a brothel; or
(c) takes or attempts to take a woman or girl, or causes a woman or girl to be taken, from one place to another with a view to her carrying on, or being brought up to carry on prostitution; or
(d) causes or induces a woman or girl to carry on prostitution;[shall be punishable on first conviction with rigorous imprisonment for a term of not less than one year and not more than two years and also with fine which may extend to two thousand rupees, and if any offence under this sub-section is committed against the will of any person, the punishment of imprisonment for a term of seven years shall extend to imprisonment for a term of fourteen years.
Provided that if the person in respect of whom an offence committed under this sub-section,- (i) is a child, the punishment provided under this sub-section shall extend to rigorous imprisonment for a term of not less than seven years but may extend to life; and (ii) is a minor, the punishment provided under this sub-section shall extend to rigourous imprisonment for a term not less than seven years and not more than fourteen years];
(3) An offence under this section shall be triable-
(a) in the place from which a woman or girl is procured, induced to go, taken or caused to be taken or from which an attempt to procure or take such woman or girl is made; or
(b) in the place to which she may have gone as a result of the inducement or to which she is taken or caused to be taken or an attempt to take her is made."
6. The applicant's counsel relies on the judgment dated 22.02.2024, passed by a coordinate Bench of this Court in Application u/s 482 No. 9161 of 2023, to argue that the applicant's case does not fall within the definitions under the Act, nor do the ingredients of Section 5 attracts to the applicant. He argues that the coordinate Bench of this Court and various High Courts have consistently ruled that the definitions of "prostitution" and the ingredients of Section 5 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956, as well as Section 8, do not apply to customers.
7. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. opposes these arguments, stating that the applicant was found at the place of incident, arrested on the spot, and was engaged in an intimate act with one of the women and based on her statement, the applicant was implicated in the FIR.
8. After considering the arguments of both parties, the record, and particularly the judgment cited by the applicant's counsel, along with the consistent rulings of other High Courts, it is observed that even if the applicant's alleged involvement are taken as true, the provisions of Section 5 of the Act cannot be applied to him as a customer. It's prosecution's case that the applicant was involved consensually with one of the women at the spa, having paid for the services. Therefore, the proceedings against the applicant are unsustainable in law.
9. Based on aforesaid deliberations, the impugned charge sheet dated 15.08.2023, the cognizance/summoning order dated 22.12.2023 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad, and the entire proceedings of Case No. 70124 of 2023, titled as State v. Ankur Chaudhary, arising from Case Crime No. 928 of 2023, under Section 5 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956, Police Station Indirapuram, District Ghaziabad, are hereby quashed.
10. Accordingly, the instant application is allowed.
Order Date :- 1.10.2024
Anil K. Sharma
Justice Vinod Diwakar
