P K Mubasheer vs The State
2022 Latest Caselaw 3564 Kant

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 3564 Kant
Judgement Date : 3 March, 2022

Karnataka High Court

P K Mubasheer vs The State on 3 March, 2022

Bench: M.Nagaprasanna

                           1



      IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

          DATED THIS THE 3RD DAY OF MARCH, 2022

                         BEFORE

        THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA

             CRIMINAL PETITION No.1903/2020

BETWEEN

P.K.MUBASHEER,
S/O P.K.MUNEER,
AGED ABOUT 20 YEARS,
R/A NO.3-62, MURAGUDDE HOUSE,
KULOOR-KAVOOR ROAD,
AMBIKA NAGAR,
KUNJATHBAIL POST,
MANGALORE - 575 015.
                                              ... PETITIONER

[BY SRI.DILRAJ JUDE ROHIT SEQUEIRA, ADVOCATE]


AND

1.    THE STATE,
      BY MANGALORE SOUTH POLICE,
      BY THE STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
      HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
      BANGALORE - 560 001.

2.    DINAKARA SHETTY,
      POLICE INSPECTOR,
      MANGALORE SOUTH POLICE STATION,
      PANDESHWARA,
      MANGALORE - 575 001.
                                            ... RESPONDENTS
[BY SMT.YASHODA K.P., HCGP FOR R1 AND R2]
                                2



     THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF
CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE ENTIRE CHARGE SHEET AND
FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN CONNECTION WITH IN CR.NO.98/2015
NOW PENDING IN C.C.NO.2537/2017 ON THE FILE OF II J.M.F.C.,
MANGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 3(1), 4 AND 8 OF IMMORAL
TRAFFIC ACT, PERTAINING TO MANGALURU SOUTH POLICE
STATION.


     THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

                              ORDER

The petitioner is before this Court calling in question

proceedings in C.C.No.2537/2017 registered for offences

punishable under Sections 3(1), 4 and 8 of the Immoral Traffic

(Prevention) Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the said Act' for

short).

2. Heard Sri. Dilraj Jude Rohit Sequeira, learned

counsel appearing for the petitioner and Smt. Yashoda K.P.,

learned HCGP appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2.

3. Facts as projected by the prosecution are as follows:

On 15.05.2015 on the basis of credible information, the

house which was owned by one Sri. Chandrashekar was

searched on the ground that the house was running business of

prostitution. At the time of the search in the brothel, the

petitioner is caught by the police and proceedings are instituted

against the petitioner for offences punishable under Sections

3(1) and 4 of the said Act. The police after investigation filed a

charge sheet in the matter. It is at that juncture, the petitioner

knocks the doors of this Court.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Sri.

Dirlaj Jude Rohit Sequeira would submit that he is only a

customer who did visit the brothel and is not the one who is

living on the business of prostitution as alleged.

5. On the other hand, learned HCGP, Smt. Yashoda

K.P., appearing for respondent Nos.1 and 2 vehemently refutes

the submissions made and would submit that the petitioner has

indulged in an act which would encourage the business of

prostitution. Since charge sheet is filed, it is a matter of trial

that the petitioner has to come out clean.

6. I have given my anxious consideration to the

respective submissions made by the learned counsel and have

perused the material on record.

7. The afore-narrated fact of search in the brothel and

the petitioner getting caught there as a customer is not in

dispute. The allegations made against the petitioner are ones

punishable under Sections 3(1), 4 and 8 of the said Act. Sections

3(1), 4 and 8 of the said Act reads as follows:

"3(1). Any person who keeps or manages,

or acts or assists in the keeping or

management of, a brothel shall be punishable on

first conviction with rigorous imprisonment for a

term of not less than one year and not more than

three years and also with fine which may extend to

two thousand rupees and in the event of a second

or subsequent conviction, with rigorous

imprisonment for a term of not less two years to

two thousand rupees.

4. Punishment for living on the earnings

of prostitution.--(1) Any person over the age of

eighteen years who knowingly lives, wholly or

in part, on the earnings of the prostitution of

[any other person] shall be punishable with

imprisonment for a term which may extend to two

years, or with fine which may extend to one

thousand rupees, or with both [and where such

earnings relate to the prostitution of a child or a

minor, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a

term of not less than seven years and not more

than ten years].

8. Seducing or soliciting for purpose of

prostitution.-Whoever, in any public place or

within sight of, and in such manner as to be

seen or heard from, any public place, whether

from within any building or not-

(a) by words, gestures, wilful exposure of

his person (whether by sitting by a

window or on the balcony of a building

or house or in any other way), or

otherwise tempts or endeavours to

tempt, or attracts or endeavours to

attract the attention of, any person for

the purpose of prostitution; or

(b) solicits or molests any person, or loiters

or acts in such manner as to cause

obstruction or annoyance to persons

residing nearby or passing by such

public place or to offend against public

decency, for the purpose of prostitution,

shall be punishable on first conviction with

imprisonment for a term which may extend to six

months, or with fine which may extend to five

hundred rupees, or with both, and in the event of a

second or subsequent conviction, with

imprisonment for a term which may extend to one

year, and also with fine which may extend to five

hundred rupees:

[Provided that where an offence under this

section is committed by a man, he shall be

punishable with imprisonment for a period of not

less than seven days but which may extend to

three months.]"