Umesh vs State Of Karnataka on 8 August, 2019

[Cites 4, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Umesh vs State Of Karnataka on 8 August, 2019

Bench: P.S. Dinesh Kumar

                           1

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

        DATED THIS THE 8TH DAY OF AUGUST 2019

                        BEFORE

       THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR

            CRIMINAL PETITION No.4905/2019

BETWEEN:

1.     UMESH,
       S/O RAMANJINAPPA,
       AGED ABOUT 35 YEARS,
       R/AT NO.231, 1ST CROSS,
       18TH MAIN ROAD, RAJAJINAGAR,
       BENGALURU 560010.

2.     NAGARAJ,
       S/O VENKATASWAMY,
       AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
       R/AT NO.110, 2ND CROSS,
       DEVASANDRA MAIN ROAD,
       NEAR VENKATESWARA TENT,
       K.R. PURAM, BENGALURU 560036.

3.     NARAYANA SWAMY,
       S/O LAKSHMAIAH,
       AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS,
       R/AT TANK ROAD, 2ND CROSS,
       K.R. PURAM, BENGALURU 560036.
                                         ... PETITIONERS

               (BY SRI P B AJIT, ADVOCATE)

AND:

STATE OF KARNATAKA,
REPRESENTED BY HALASURU POLICE STATION,
HALSURU, BENGALURU.
                                 2

REPRESENTED BY SPP,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
BANGALORE 560 001.
                                                 ... RESPONDENT

                 (BY SRI S. RACHAIAH, HCGP)

      THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION
482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET DATED
9.2.2015 FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT POLICE AND THE
CONSEQUENTIAL PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.9550/2015 ON
THE FILE OF THE I ADDITIONAL METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE AND TRAFFIC COURT AT BENGALURU (MMTC-1)
INSOFAR AS THE PETITIONERS ARE CONCERNED (AS PER
ANNEXURE-A)

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

                           ORDER

Sri P.B. Ajit, learned advocate for the petitioners submits that, police conducted a raid on a brothel house and apprehended the petitioners. They have been charged for commission of offences punishable under Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 ('the Act' for short). Petitioners are the customers and therefore, the said penal provisions of the Act are not attracted against them.

2. The submission of learned advocate for the petitioners is not disputed by the learned High Court Government Pleader.

3. This Court has taken a consistent view that the penal provisions of the Act are not applicable so far as customers in a brothel house are concerned. [See Narasimha Murthy vs. The State by Hennuru Police Station and another (Crl.P.No.5275/2017 D.D. 07.12.2017)].

4. In the circumstances, following the said decision, this petition is allowed and the proceedings in C.C.No.9550/2015, on the file of the I Additional Metropolitan Magistrate and Traffic Court, Bengaluru (MMTC-1), are quashed, so far as the petitioners are concerned.

In view of disposal of the petition, I.A.No.1/2019 does not survive for consideration and the same is also disposed of.

No costs.

Sd/-

JUDGE MD

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court