Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act Does Not per se Criminalize Prostitution : Bombay High Court

Must Read

Doctrine of Proportionality Must Adhere to Reasonableness Principal Test: Madras High Court

Young Men's Christian Association built a commercial complex and leased it without having due permission. The District Collector &...

Delhi High Court Refuses To Stay Release of ‘The White Tiger’ on the OTT Platform Netflix

A plea requesting a stay on the release of the film ‘The White Tiger’ by the American producer, John Hart Jr. alleging copyright violation was rejected by the Delhi High Court on Thursday.

“Anganwadi Centers to Be Reopened Outside the Containment Zones, Which Is to Be Decided by the State”: Supreme Court

This case concerns the reopening of the Anganwadi Centers after they had been closed due to the lockdown being...

“Credit Facilities Being Granted by the Primary Agricultural Credit Society to the Non-Members Is No Longer Illegal”: Supreme Court

This Case concerns the dispute relating to the grant of tax exemption under Section 80P of the Income Tax...

Back Wages of Labourers is a Question of Facts Depending Upon Various Factors: Gujarat High Court

The petition has been filed by workmen and employer against an award dated 23.04.2009 passed by the Labour Court,...

WhatsApp Messages Would Have No Evidentiary Value Until They Are Certified According to Section 65b of the Indian Evidence Act: Punjab & Haryana High...

Brief facts of the case Paramjit Kaur, the proprietor of Brioshine Pharma, a licensed chemist, booked two consignments. The first...

Follow us

A single bench of the Bombay High Court of Justice Prithviraj K. Chauhan passed the final order in the case of Kajal Mukesh Singh & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra. In the present case, the Court interpreted various provisions of the Immoral Traffic Act while taking into account fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution.

Facts of the Case

In this case, a raid was conducted by the Mumbai police relating to prostitution activity being carried out by a procurer named Nijjamuddin Khan. For carrying out this raid, the investigation officers set a trap to rescue the victims of prostitution and to arrest the procurer. The trap was successfully laid down. Following this, three of the victims were arrested and were charged under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 by the Magistrate. The victims were asked to call their family members. Later, it was ascertained that the victims belonged to the “bediya” community, where the ritual is that a girl has attained puberty is sent to prostitution. Thereafter, the victims were directed to be sent to a shelter home “Nari Niketan Prayag Vastigruha” located in Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh for one year for their care, protection, shelter and vocational training.

The said order of the magistrate was challenged by the victims before the Sessions Court. However, the Sessions Court dismissed the said petition. Therefore, the victims invoked the jurisdiction of the high court via Article 227 of the Constitution as well as Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Petitioner’s Arguments

The Counsel for the Petitioners argued that the lower courts failed to acknowledge the interpretation of Section 17 of the Immoral Traffic Act which is not a penal provision, as the victims were not accused nor being prosecuted via section 3 and 9 of the act.

Secondly, the Counsel argued that the victims are majors under the eyes of the law. Hence, they have the right to choose their profession. The Counsel further argued that to bring the victims within the ambit of these provisions, the said victims must be caught doing such immoral acts. However, in the raid conducted by the police, the victims were not found with any customer neither were they accused of indulging in any immoral act.

Thus, there is no point of their continued detention in the shelter home as they are not being prosecuted under the said Act.

Court’s Observations

After going through the arguments made, and evidence presented, the Court made the following observations. Firstly, the order dated 30th September 2019 passed by the Magistrate, shows that the victims were remanded via order 28th September 2019. The lacuna here is that none of the orders can show where the victims were held for these three days. This casualness in holding the victims directly contravenes the provision of the Act which mandates for the safe custody of victims.

No charges have been filed against the victims that they were indulging in acts of prostitution. To send the victims under this Act to detention, there a committee is to be constituted by the Magistrate, under this Act. In the present case, the same was not constituted. The argument on behalf of the Respondent that the word “may” appears in section 17(5) of the act providing the option to the Magistrate to constitute a committee cannot hold ground. The word “may” has to be interpreted as “shall” and the same is supported by Delhi High Court judgment in Kumari Sangeeta vs. State of Delhi and Ors.

The Court also observed that the Immoral Traffic act only punishes sexual abuse and commercial exploitation and not prostitution per se.To this end, the Court observed that under Article 19 of the Constitution, citizens are guaranteed the fundamental right to move freely around the country and to choose their occupation. As the victims in the present instance are majors and are not being prosecuted under the Act, there is no need for their detention in the corrective home.

No proper investigation report was submitted by the police to prove whether the said procurer Nijjamuddin was engaged in running a brothel.

Judgment by the Court

Firstly, the Court quashed the order of the Magistrate.

Secondly, the Court held that the Petitioners are to be freed from their custody at the corrective home.


Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgment from courts. Follow us on Google News, InstagramLinkedInFacebook & Twitter. You can subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.

1 COMMENT

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Doctrine of Proportionality Must Adhere to Reasonableness Principal Test: Madras High Court

Young Men's Christian Association built a commercial complex and leased it without having due permission. The District Collector & Tahsildar issued a show-cause notice...

Delhi High Court Refuses To Stay Release of ‘The White Tiger’ on the OTT Platform Netflix

A plea requesting a stay on the release of the film ‘The White Tiger’ by the American producer, John Hart Jr. alleging copyright violation was rejected by the Delhi High Court on Thursday.

“Anganwadi Centers to Be Reopened Outside the Containment Zones, Which Is to Be Decided by the State”: Supreme Court

This case concerns the reopening of the Anganwadi Centers after they had been closed due to the lockdown being imposed.  Brief facts of the case This...

“Credit Facilities Being Granted by the Primary Agricultural Credit Society to the Non-Members Is No Longer Illegal”: Supreme Court

This Case concerns the dispute relating to the grant of tax exemption under Section 80P of the Income Tax Act, 1961.  Brief facts of the...

Back Wages of Labourers is a Question of Facts Depending Upon Various Factors: Gujarat High Court

The petition has been filed by workmen and employer against an award dated 23.04.2009 passed by the Labour Court, Bhuj in the case of...

WhatsApp Messages Would Have No Evidentiary Value Until They Are Certified According to Section 65b of the Indian Evidence Act: Punjab & Haryana High...

Brief facts of the case Paramjit Kaur, the proprietor of Brioshine Pharma, a licensed chemist, booked two consignments. The first consignment, on 10.06.2020 and the,...

Delhi High Court Seeks Response From Centre, RBI in PIL to Regulate Online Lending Platforms

A notice had been issued by the Delhi HC in a PIL that sought regulation of online lending platforms (Dharanidhar Karimojji vs UOI). Brief Facts: The...

“Consensual Affair” Cannot Be Defence Against the Charge of Kidnapping of the Minor, Sentence Reduced in View of Age Difference: Supreme Court

This Case concerns the appeal against the conviction under the charges of kidnapping and discussed whether the punishment was to be enhanced or not.   Brief...

Delhi HC to Municipal Corp: Paucity of Funds Not an Excuse for Non-Payment of Salaries and Pensions

The Delhi High Court ruled that the paucity of funds cannot be an excuse and pulled up municipal corporations for not paying salaries and pensions to their employees as the right to receive payment is a fundamental right guaranteed in our constitution.

US Supreme Court Reinstates Restriction on Abortion Pills

The Supreme Court of the United States granted the Trump administration’s request to reinstate federal rules requiring women to make in-person visits to hospitals...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -