Kunibilla Janardhan vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 2519 AP

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY

CRIMINAL PETITION No.3788 of 2022 ORDER:-

This Criminal Petition under Section 482 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "Cr.P.C.") is filed seeking

quash of charge sheet in P.R.C.No.56 of 2021 on the file of the

learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Special Mobile Court,

Guntur.

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

Additional Public Prosecutor for the State.

The petitioner is A-4 in P.R.C.No.56 of 2021 on the file of the

learned Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Special Mobile Court,

Guntur. The said case arises out of Crime No.326 of 2021 of

Kothapet Police Station.

Initially, a case in the above crime was registered for the

offences punishable under Section 370(3) IPC and under Sections

3, 4, 5 and 7 of the Prevention of Immoral Trafficking Act on the

ground that when the police raided the brothel house that the

petitioner was found in the premises of the brothel house as a

customer, who visited the brothel house for prostitution. On

completion of investigation, the police filed charge sheet against

the petitioner and other accused.

Now, the petitioner, who is A-4, seeks quash of the said

charge sheet filed against him on the ground that the said criminal

proceedings are not maintainable against a person who was found

at the brothel house only as a customer. Learned counsel for the

petitioner would submit that this is a covered matter and this

Court has earlier in several cases held that a customer who visited

the brothel house for prostitution is not liable for prosecution.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor fairly concedes that it

is a covered matter in view of the earlier judgments passed by this

Court to that effect. Therefore, he prayed to pass appropriate order

accordingly in this Criminal Petition.

The Karnataka High Court has earlier in the case of Sri

Roopendra Singh v. State of Karnataka1 held that a customer

who visited brothel house for prostitution is not liable for

prosecution. This Court in Z.Lourdiah Naidu v. State of A.P.2

and Goenka Sajan Kumar v. the State of A.P3 also held that

customer who visited the brothel house for prostitution is not

liable for prosecution. Based on the above said judgments, this

Court also earlier quashed the criminal proceedings initiated

against a customer who was found at the brothel house. Therefore,

in view of the settled law in this regard as stated supra, the charge

sheet filed against the petitioner in P.R.C. No.56 of 2021 is liable to

be quashed in view of the fact that it is admitted case of the

prosecution that the petitioner is only a customer who visited the

brothel house for prostitution.

Resultantly, the Criminal Petition is allowed and the

aforesaid charge sheet filed against the petitioner, who is A-4, in

P.R.C.No.56 of 2021 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate

of First Class, Special Mobile Court, Guntur, is hereby quashed.

The proceedings against the other accused shall go on.

Miscellaneous petitions, if any pending, in the Criminal

Petition, shall stand closed.

_____________________________________________ JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY Date: 14.06.2022 AKN

Order, dated 20.01.2021, in Crl.P.No.312 of 2020, of the Karnataka High Court at Bengaluru.

2013 (2) ALD (Cri) 393 = 2014 (1) ALT (Cri) 322 (A.P.)

2014 (2) ALD (Cri) 264 = 2015 (1) ALT (Cri) 85 (A.P)

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY

CRIMINAL PETITION No.3788 of 2022

Date: 14-06-2022

AKN