Anil Kumar J vs State by

Type Court Judgment Court Karnataka Decided Apr 25, 2024

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1903775

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1903775
Court: Karnataka High Court
Judge: S Vishwajith Shetty
Decided On: Apr 25, 2024
Case Number: CRL.P/3813/2024

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Anil Kumar J

Respondent

State by

Excerpt

.....the court of xlv acc & sj, bengaluru arising out of crime no.4/2018 registered by konanakunte police station for offences punishable under section 3, 4, 5 and 7 of immoral traffic (prevention) act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act' for short) and section 370 of indian penal code, 1860.2. learned counsel for the petitioner submits thatthe investigation in the case is complete and charge sheet has been filed. in the charge sheet, the allegation against -3- accused nos.3 and 4 is that they were the customers who were found in the premise in question at the time of raid. he submits that the provisions of the act cannot be invoked as against the customers and this court in crl.p.no.2119/2022 disposed of on 04.04.2022 in the case of babu vs. state has already considered this aspect of the matter and has quashed the criminal proceedings as against the customer.3. learned high court government pleader however, has opposed the petition.4. the material on record goes to show that thepolice after raiding the premises in question had apprehended four persons who are arrayed as accused nos.1 to 4 in the charge sheet. as per the charge sheet allegations, accused nos.3 and 4 were customers found in the premises in question at the time of raid. this court in'babu vs. state', in crl.p.no.2119/2022, has heldthat a customer in a brothel cannot be hauled into criminal -4- proceedings and the provisions of the act cannot be invoked as against him.5. under the circumstances, i am of the opinionthat the impugned proceedings as against the petitioner herein cannot be sustained. accordingly, the petition is allowed. the entire proceedings in s.c.no.1963/2018 pending before xlv acc & sj, bengaluruarising out of crime no.4/2018 registered by konanakunte police station for offences punishable under section 3, 4, 5 and 7 of immoral traffic (prevention) act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act' for short) and section 370 of indian penal.....

Full Judgment

-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 25TH DAY OF APRIL, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3813 OF 2024 BETWEEN: ANIL KUMAR J., S/O LATE JAYARAMU AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS RESIDING AT NO.177, SUBRAMANYA BUILDING, VASHANTHAPURA MAIN ROAD, KONANAKUNTE CROSS, BANGALORE - 683 576. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. RAJU C.N., ADVOCATE) AND:
1. STATE BY BANGALORE, REPRESENTED BY SPP, Digitally signed by HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, PAVITHRA N AT BANGALORE - 560 001. Location: High Court of Karnataka
2. T.M. DHARMENDRA, S/O NOT KNOWN, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, POLICE INSPECTOR, BANGALORE. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. R. RANGASWAMY, HCGP) -2- THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET FILED AGAINST THE PETITIONER IN S.C.NO.1963/2018 ON THE FILE OF THE XLV A.C.C AND SJ
BENGALURU ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.4/2018 OF KONANAKUNTE POLICE BENGALURU FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 3,4,5,7 OF IMMORAL TRAFFIC PREVENTION ACT AND 370 OF IPC BY ALLOWING THIS PETITION. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

Accused No.4 is before this court with a prayer to quash the entire proceedings in S.C.No.1963/2018 pending before the court of XLV ACC & SJ, Bengaluru arising out of Crime No.4/2018 registered by Konanakunte Police Station for offences punishable under Section 3, 4, 5 and 7 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short) and Section 370 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

the investigation in the case is complete and charge sheet has been filed. In the charge sheet, the allegation against -3- accused Nos.3 and 4 is that they were the customers who were found in the premise in question at the time of raid. He submits that the provisions of the Act cannot be invoked as against the customers and this court in Crl.P.No.2119/2022 disposed of on 04.04.2022 in the case of BABU VS. STATE has already considered this aspect of the matter and has quashed the criminal proceedings as against the customer.

3. Learned High Court Government Pleader however, has opposed the petition.

4. The material on record goes to show that the

police after raiding the premises in question had apprehended four persons who are arrayed as accused Nos.1 to 4 in the charge sheet. As per the charge sheet allegations, accused Nos.3 and 4 were customers found in the premises in question at the time of raid. This court in

'BABU VS. STATE', in Crl.P.No.2119/2022, has held

that a customer in a brothel cannot be hauled into criminal -4- proceedings and the provisions of the Act cannot be invoked as against him.

5. Under the circumstances, I am of the opinion

that the impugned proceedings as against the petitioner herein cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. The entire proceedings in S.C.No.1963/2018 pending before XLV ACC & SJ, Bengaluruarising out of Crime No.4/2018 registered by Konanakunte Police Station for offences punishable under Section 3, 4, 5 and 7 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short) and Section 370 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 is quashed as against the petitioner is concerned. Sd/- JUDGE SS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 73

Same Court & Year Karnataka · 2024 Same Parties Anil Kumar J vs State by Same Judge S Vishwajith Shetty