Karnataka High Court
Jagadeesh P vs State Of Karnataka on 26 February, 2024
Author: K.Natarajan
Bench: K.Natarajan
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:7808
CRL.P No. 4901 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 26TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 4901 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
JAGADEESH P
S/O PRAKASHAPPA,
AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS,
2ND CROSS, D.L.F AKSHAYA NAGAR,
SUGAMA LAYOUT, BANGALORE - 560 076.
PRESENTLY R/AT BANJENAHALLI, KADUR TALUK,
MATHIGATTA, CHICKMAGALUR DISTRICT - 577 548.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. ANEES AHMED, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY HENNUR POLICE STATION,
BENGALURU CITY,
REPRESENTED BY ITS STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT BUILDING,
Digitally signed by
BHAVANI BAI G DR. B.R.AMBEDKAR VEEDHI,
Location: High BENGALURU - 560 001.
Court of Karnataka
2. ANJUMALA T NAIK
POLICE INSPECTOR,
CCB, WOMEN PROTECTION CORPS,
N.T.PETE, BENGALURU - 560 002.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. A.N.ANITHA GIRISH, HCGP)
Digitally signed by
BHAVANI BAI G
Location: High
Court of Karnataka
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C NO.
54177/2021 (CRIME NO.22/2021) AGAINST THE PETITIONER
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:7808
CRL.P No. 4901 of 2022
FOR THE OFFENCE PUNISHABLE U/S 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 OF IMMORAL
TRAFFIC PREVENTION ACT, 1956 AND SECTION 370 OF THE
IPC 1860, PENDING ON THE XI ACMM, MAYO HALL,
BENGALURU CITY, BENGALURU.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This petition is filed by the petitioner-accused No.3 under
Section 482 of Cr.P.C., for quashing the criminal proceedings in
C.C.No.54177/2021 now pending on the file of LXXI Additional
City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-72) in
S.C.No.563/2023 arising out of Crime No.22/2021 registered
by Hennur Police Station, Bengaluru and charge sheeted for the
offences punishable under Sections 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 of the
Immoral Traffic (Prevention Act), 1956 (for short 'ITP Act') and
Section 370 of IPC.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and
learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondents.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the sou motu
complaint registered by respondent No.2-CCB before the
Hennur Police on 5.2.2021 alleging that on the credible
NC: 2024:KHC:7808
information they raided the house No.154, Janaki Ram Layout,
Geddalahalli, K.R. Puram Hobli, Bengaluru comes under Hennur
Police station limits where they got information that the
accused No.1 is running brothel. Accordingly, at 11.30 p.m.,
they raided the spot where accused No.1 was not present.
They seen three young girls who were used for prostitution.
Accordingly, they apprehended this petitioner and others. After
registering the case, the charge sheet also filed. Now case is
before the Sessions Judge, which is under challenge.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
petitioner-accused No.3 is only a customer and he was not
running the brothel or prostitution. Therefore, the offence
alleged against him is not sustainable under the law and the
offence under Section 370 is also not attracted against him as
he is only a customer. The learned counsel also relied upon the
judgment of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of
Barath S.P. vs. State and another in Crl.P.No.1757/2022
dated 24.03.2022 and prayed for quashing the criminal
proceedings.
NC: 2024:KHC:7808
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader
objected the petition.
6. Having heard the arguments and on perusal of the
records, especially the charge sheet material placed on record
which reveals, the petitioner is said to be a customer and he is
not running the brothel. Therefore, Sections 5, 4 and 6 attracts
against accused No.1 and not against the petitioner. The Co-
ordinate Bench of this Court has taken similar view in the case
of Barath stated supra and quashed the criminal proceedings.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the
case, the petitioner being the customer cannot be prostituted
under Sub-Section either Sections 3, 4, 5 to 7 of ITP Act or
Section 370 of IPC which attracts against accused No.1.
Therefore, continuing the proceedings against the petitioner is
abuse of process of law.
8. Accordingly, the petition is allowed.
The criminal proceedings against the petitioner-accused
No.3 in C.C.No.54177/2021 now pending on the file of LXXI
Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-72) in
NC: 2024:KHC:7808
S.C.No.563/2023 arising out of Crime No.22/2021 registered
by Hennur Police Station, Bengaluru, is hereby quashed.
9. In view of disposal of the main petition, pending
I.A.No.1/2022 does not survive for consideration and the same
is disposed of.
Sd/-
JUDGE
GBB
CT:SK
