Karnataka High Court
Smt. Ayesha Begum vs State Of Karnataka on 22 March, 2024
Author: K.Natarajan
Bench: K.Natarajan
-1-
NC: 2024:KHC:11924
CRL.P No. 9182 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH, 2024
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE K.NATARAJAN
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9182 OF 2022
BETWEEN:
SMT. AYESHA BEGUM,
W/O BABU,
AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS,
R/AT NO.282, 17TH 'F' MAIN,
5TH BLOCK, KORAMANGALA,
BENGALURU - 560 034.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. G.M. SRINIVASAREDDY, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REP BY HALASURU POLICE STATION,
Digitally THROUGH STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
signed by V HIGH COURT BUILDING,
KRISHNA
BENGALURU - 560 001.
Location:
High Court
of 2. SUBRAMANYA,
Karnataka POLICE INSPECTOR,
HALASURU POLICE STATION,
BENGALURU - 560 038.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL, HCGP)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO
QUASH THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.53647/2018
-2-
NC: 2024:KHC:11924
CRL.P No. 9182 of 2022
REGISTERED BY HALASURU POLICE STATION FOR THE
OFFENCE P/U/S 3, 4, 5 AND 7 OF IMMORAL TRAFFIC
PREVENTION ACT AND SECTION 370 OF IPC, WHICH IS NOW
PENDING BEFORE THE X ADDL.C.M.M,. MAYO HALL,
BENGALURU.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
This Petition is filed by the petitioner/Accused No.1 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., for quashing the criminal proceedings in C.C.No.53647/2018 arising out of Crime No.232/2017 registered by Halasuru Police Station and charge sheeted for the offences punishable under Section 370 of IPC and Sections 3, 4, 5 and 7 of Immoral Traffic Prevention Act (in short 'ITP Act').
2. Heard arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner and learned High Court Government Pleader.
3. The case of the prosecution is that the Police Inspector, Halasuru Police Station got credible information on 29.06.2017 while he was on patrol that in a service apartment at S.N.Comfort, bearing No.442/462, situated at 6th Main, -3- NC: 2024:KHC:11924 CRL.P No. 9182 of 2022 Amarajyothi Layout, Dommaluru Layout, Bengaluru, some persons were running Brothel in the house by bringing the girls from some other State. Immediately, he planned to conduct a raid and employed one Sri.Yallappa as decoy. After talking with this petitioner and paying money, the Police Inspector along with his staff, gave a signal to the Police in the apartment where the accused is said to be running a brothel house by bringing two to five girls from some other State and using them for prostitution for livelihood. Thereafter, the Sub-Inspector of Police along with other Panchas, conducted the raid. Between 4.00 p.m., and 6.30 p.m., the Panchas came to the Police Station and registered an F.I.R at Halasuru Police Station. Thereafter, investigation was done by the P.S.I and filed charge sheet, which is under challenge.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner seriously contended on the main ground that as per Section 13(2) of ITP Act, the Police Sub-Inspector has no power to investigate the matter and an officer not below the rank of Assistant Commissioner of Police, shall conduct the case. The Police Inspector raided the spot, prepared the sketch and prepared Panchanama. Subsequently, F.I.R is registered. There is violation of the -4- NC: 2024:KHC:11924 CRL.P No. 9182 of 2022 settled position of law by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Lalita Kumari vs. Government of Uttar Pradesh and others reported in (2014) 2 SCC 1.
5. Per contra, learned High Court Government Pleader objected the petition.
6. On perusal of the complaint of Police Inspector, when he was on patrol duty on 29.06.2017, he got the information of immoral trafficking of girls. He went to S.N.Comfort service apartment, bearing No.442/462, situated at 6th Main, Amarajyothi Layout, Dommaluru Layout, Bengaluru. He has sent decoy Police man along with constable and after confirmation, they left the spot, seized the cash and then prepared Panchanama and apprehended the accused. He found that some girls were present in the apartment who were being sent to customers for prostitution. The Panchanama came to be prepared between 4.00 p.m., and 6.30 p.m. After preparing Panchanama, he came to the Police Station along with accused persons and registered the F.I.R at 6.40 p.m. Registration of F.I.R subsequent to taking action by the Police Officer amounts to investigating the case without registering an F.I.R., which is -5- NC: 2024:KHC:11924 CRL.P No. 9182 of 2022 in violation of the principles laid down as per Lalita Kumari's case supra.
7. In similar matters, the co-ordinate Benche in Criminal Petition No.7589/2019 (D.D: 28.06.2022) and another co- ordinate Bench in Criminal Petition No.6634/2022 (D.D:
29.07.2022) have quashed the criminal proceedings based on the violation of the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Lalita Kumari's case supra, wherein, it is observed that in a cognizable case, the Police Inspector without registering the F.I.R, cannot investigate the matter.
Considering the same, there is a clear violation of guidelines of Lalita Kumari's case. That apart, as per Section 13(2) of the Immoral Traffic Prevention Act (in short 'ITP Act'), the Police officer investigating the case shall not be below the rank of Assistant Commissioner of Police. Whereas, in this case, Sub- Inspector of Police filed charge sheet who has no authority to file charge sheet under Section 13(2) of the ITP Act. Therefore, on these grounds, investigation and criminal proceedings are not sustainable in law.
-6-
NC: 2024:KHC:11924 CRL.P No. 9182 of 2022
8. Following the Judgments of the co-ordinate Benches of this Court (supra), I pass the following:
ORDER Criminal Petition is allowed. Proceedings in C.C.No.53647/2018 (Crime No.232/2017) on the file of the X Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Mayohall, Bengaluru, stands quashed as regards the present petitioner/Accused No.1 is concerned.
Sd/-
JUDGE BNV List No.: 1 Sl No.: 15