Bangalore District Court
State By; vs S.P.Selvaraj on 17 April, 2017
IN THE COURT OF THE LXVIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL
AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU CITY (CCH-69)
Dated this the 17th day of April 2017
: PRESENT :
Sri.Shivaji Anant Nalawade, B.Com., LL.B.(Spl)
LXVIII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge,
Bengaluru City.
SESSION CASE No.468/2015
COMPLAINANT : State by;
Pulikeshinagara Police Station, Bengaluru.
(By Learned Public Prosecutor)
- Vs -
ACCUSED : 1. S.P.Selvaraj
S/o Late.Sagayan,
Aged about 62 years,
Residing at No.32,
Anjanappa Temple Road,
Ramesh Kumar Road,
Ramaswamy Palya,
Bengaluru - 84.
2. Smt.Indrani Benjamin .........Abated
3. Annamma @ Meena
W/o Andru,
Aged about 32 years,
C/o Chinnappa's House,
2nd Floor, Opposite Bata Showroom,
Near Banasawadi Flyover,
Sevanagara, Bengaluru.
2 S.C.468/2015
4. Vinay Kumar
S/o K.V.Nagaraj Achar,
Aged about 32 years,
Residing at Sri Enclave,
No.72, Ganapa Nilaya,
Nyanappanahalli,
Bannerghatta Road,
Bengaluru.
5. Vinu Philiks W/o Vinod
S/o Philiks Mathew,
Aged about 33 years,
Residing at No.EG-111,
Ittina Neela Apartment,
Chandapura, Electronic City,
Bengaluru.
6. Darshan Belliyappa
S/o Thimmaiah,
Aged about 30 years,
C/o Thimmanna,
Residing at No.10,
Amlok Residency,
Makam Road, Ashoka Nagara,
Bengaluru.
(Accused No.1, 3 by Sri.T.C.S.,
Accused No.4, 6 by Sri.S.C.,
Accused No.5 by Sri.S.M., Advocates)
1. Date of commission of offence 24-12-2013
2. Date of report of occurrence 24-12-2013
3. Date of commencement of evidence 25-07-2016
4. Date of closing of evidence 13-03-2017
3 S.C.468/2015
5. Name of the complainant M.H.Sathish
6. Offences complained of Sec.3, 4, 5, 7 of ITP
Act and Sec.370 of
I.P.C.
7. Opinion of the Judge As per the final order
8. Order of sentence Offences not proved
JUDGMENT
This case is committed by the XI Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Bangalore City, to the Hon'ble Prl. City Civil and Sessions Court, Bangalore on the ground that offences punishable under Sec.3, 4, 5, 7 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act and Sec.370 of I.P.C. are exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions.
2. The Police Inspector of Pulikeshinagara Police Station has filed charge-sheet against accused for the offences under Sec.3, 4, 5, 7 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act and Sec.370 of I.P.C. arising out of Pulikeshinagara Police Station in Crime No.381/2013.
3. The brief facts of the prosecution case is as under:
It is the case of the Prosecution that, CW.1 who is the Police Inspector of C.C.B., Bengaluru on 24-12-2013 when in 4 S.C.468/2015 his office, Nagaraj-ACP told CW.1 that he has received information stating that near Halasur Lake on Mini Avenue Tank Road, Tank Road, Door No.39/9 in the first floor, Aroma Touch Beauty Parlor is running and there prostitution is going on. Further Nagaraj-ACP told CW.1 to confirm the information and conduct raid thereafter CW.1 at 6.45 p.m. called CW.11- Police Sub-Inspector and CW.12 to CW.15-officials and came along with them near the spot. There CW.1 called CW.2 and CW.3-Panchas and served notice on them. Thereafter, CW.1 has called CW.4-Krishna as decoy at 7.00 p.m. CW.1 has handed-over Rs.2,500/- to CW.4 and told him to go to Aroma Touch and confirm whether prostitution is going on there and intimate by making signs if information is correct. CW.4 went there and at 7.15 p.m. intimated that information is correct. Thereafter, CW.1, his officials and Panchas came to Aroma Touch and conducted raid, catch-hold accused No.1 and 3, who were running prostitution, CW.1 has catch-hold accused No.4 to 6 who are the customers who came there for prostitution. CW.1 has rescued CW.5 to CW.9-victim women. CW.1 has enquired the rescued women, CW.5 to CW.9 have 5 S.C.468/2015 told that accused No.1 to 3 are running prostitution by name Aroma Touch Parlor and accused No.1 to 3 called them saying that they will provide work to them and got involved them in the prostitution saying that they can earn good money. Further they told that accused No.1 to 3 have paid some amount recovered from the customers and keeping remaining part of amount with them, thereafter CW.1 has drawn Mahazar in presence of Panchas and seized cash of Rs.11,000/-, 5 Mobile Phones, 4 Condoms. Thereafter, CW.1 has brought the accused persons, properties seized and CW.5 to CW.9-the rescued persons, to the Pulikeshinagara Police Station and produced them before CW.16 and submitted Report.
3(a) CW.16 who is the Police Sub-Inspector of Pulikeshinagara Police Station on 24-09-2013 at 8.45 p.m., when in the Police Station, CW.1 came to the Police Station along with 5 accused persons, properties seized from them and 5 rescued persons, produced before CW.16 and submitted Report, CW.16 on the basis of the Report registered case in Crime No.381/2013 and submitted FIR to the Court. CW.16 6 S.C.468/2015 has arrested accused No.1 to 5, they have given voluntary statement, CW.16 has recorded the same, CW.16 has enquired the rescued women-CW.5 to CW.9 and recorded their statements, thereafter CW.16 has entrusted CW.5 to CW.9-rescued persons to their relatives, on the same day CW.16 has recorded statements of CW.11 to CW.17. CW.16 has subjected the properties under P.F.No.3/2013. On 20-02- 2014, CW.16 has recorded the statement of CW.10, thereafter handed-over the further investigation to CW.18. CW.18 who is the Police Inspector of Pulikeshinagara Police Station on 15- 03-2014 has taken further investigation from CW.16 and scrutinized the investigation, thereafter as the investigation is completed, CW.18 has filed the charge-sheet.
4. After filing the charge-sheet by the Investigating Officer, XI Addl. City Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Bengaluru has taken cognizance and registered the case in C.C.55508/2014. Thereafter, XI Addl. City Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Bengaluru has secured the presence of accused No.1 to 6 and furnished charge-sheet copies to them as contemplated under Sec.207 of Cr.P.C. and committed the 7 S.C.468/2015 case against accused before the Hon'ble Prl. City Civil and Sessions Court, Bangalore and that was registered as S.C.468/2015 and made over to this court for disposal according to law as the offences alleged against the accused under Sec.3, 4, 5, 7 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act and Sec.370 of I.P.C. are exclusively triable by the Sessions Court.
5. After receipt of the papers this court has secured presence of accused No.1 to 6 and enlarged them on bail. Thereafter, heard the counsel for accused and learned Public Prosecutor for state on charge to be framed. Charge under Sec.228 Cr.P.C. framed against the accused for the offences under Sec.3, 4, 5, 7 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act and Sec.370 of I.P.C. and read-over to the accused in the open court, accused pleaded not guilty and claim to be tried. Thereafter, Prosecution is called upon to prove the guilt of the accused by examining the Prosecution witnesses.
6. Prosecution in order to prove the guilt of the accused beyond all reasonable doubt in all examined 5 witnesses as PW.1 to 5, got marked 7 documents as per Ex.P1 to 7 and marked 7 material objects as MO.1 to 7 and closed its 8 S.C.468/2015 side. During the pendency of this case, accused No.2 reported dead hence case against accused No.2 dismissed as abated, thereafter case is posted for recording Sec.313 Cr.P.C. statement of the accused. Accused are examined under Sec.313 Cr.P.C. to enable them to explain the incriminating circumstances appearing against them in the prosecution evidence. Accused denied the statement in toto and further stated that accused have no defence evidence and they have nothing to say, thereafter the case is posted for arguments.
7. Heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the accused and learned Public Prosecutor for state in length.
8. The points that arise for my determination are:
1) Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that accused No.1 and 2 on 24-
12-2013 at 7.15 p.m. within the limits of Pulikeshinagara Police Station in a public place i.e., on the Mini Avenue Tank Road, in the house belongs to CW.10 bearing No.39/9 in the first floor, obtained the said house on rental basis and running there a Parlor by name Aroma Touch and 9 S.C.468/2015 thereafter in order to earn more money for leading luxurious life, started prostitution in the said place and converted the parlor as place for doing prostitution and have kept accused No.3 as in-charge for the prostitution and accused No.3 has co-operated accused No.1 and 2 for conducting prostitution in the said place and accused No.1 to 3 are leading their life in the income derived from the prostitution and thereby committed the offence under Sec.3 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act?
2) Further the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that accused on the above said date, time and place, were doing prostitution with the assistance of accused No.3, accused No.2 and 3 have called CW.5 to CW.9-women to the beauty parlor saying that they will provide work to them and thereafter noting that as CW.5 to CW.9 are in need of more money showing lure to them to give more money, involved them in the prostitution and CW.5 to 9 have agreed for the same and accused No.1 to 3 were running prostitution and kept CW.5 to CW.9 in their custody and calling the customers, accused No.1 was collecting the customers, accused No.3 was fixing the rate with 10 S.C.468/2015 the customers by showing the girls, accused No.1 to 3 use to give some amount to the said women and retaining the remaining portion and leading their life by prostitution, and on 24-12-2013 at 7.15 p.m. when CW.1 along with CW.11 to 15 has conducted raid in the said Parlor, accused No.1 and 3 were found doing prostitution in the said house and CW.4 to 6 found as customers to the said prostitution and CW.5 to 9 were the rescued women and thereby accused have committed the offence punishable under Sec.4, 5, 7 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act and Sec.370 of I.P.C.?
3) What order?
9. My findings on the above points are as follows:
Point No.1 & 2 : In the Negative;
Point No.3 : As per final order
For the following;
REASONS
10. POINT No.1 AND 2: The above points are
connected; hence they are taken up together for discussion in order to avoid repetition.11 S.C.468/2015
11. It is the case of the prosecution that the accused have committed the offences punishable under Sec.3, 4, 5, 7 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act and Sec.370 of I.P.C. and in order to prove the guilt of the accused the prosecution in all examined 5 witnesses and they are;
PW.1-Sathish M.H. son of Mahalingappa-complainant, PW.2-Gopal son of Bhaskar-Pancha who accompanied the complainant, PW.3-Dr.Sunitha B -Medical Officer of BBMP Pulikeshinagara Circle, PW.4-V.V.Dayanand son of Veeranna- Police Sub-Inspector/Investigating Officer who has conducted earlier part of investigation, PW.5-Mohammed Rafi son of Mohammed Usman-Police Inspector/Investigating Officer who has conducted later part of investigation.
12. The prosecution in order to prove guilt of the accused in all got marked 7 documents and they are;
Ex.P1-Spot cum Seizure Mahazar, Ex.P2-Complaint, Ex.P3-Notice given to the Panchas, Ex.P4-Records of Reasons, Ex.P5-letter written by Medical Officer of BBMP Pulikeshinagara Circle to the Police Inspector, Ex.P6-FIR, Ex.P7-P.F. 12 S.C.468/2015
13. The prosecution in order to prove guilt of the accused in all got marked 7 Material Objects and they are;
MO.1-One Samsung Mobile, MO.2-Cash of Rs.11,000/-, MO.3- 4 Condoms, MO.4- One Nokia Mobile, MO.5-One Samsung Mobile, MO.6- One Blackberry Mobile, MO.7-One Lenovo Mobile.
14. Prosecution in order to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt examined PW.1 and PW.1 is the complainant and he in his evidence stated that in the year 2013 he was working as Police Inspector at CCB, Bengaluru. On 24-12-2013 when he was in the Police Station, Nagaraj- ACP called him and told him that he has received information stating that near Halasur Lake, Mini Avenue Tank Road, No.39/9, in the first floor, beauty parlor by name Aroma Touch is running and there prostitution is going on and asked him to confirm the information and conduct the raid. Thereafter, on the same day at 6.45 p.m., he called CW.11-Bhadramma- Inspector and CW.12 to 15-officials and came near the spot, there he called CW.2 and 3-Panchas and issued notice to them, thereafter at 7.00 p.m. he called CW.4-Krishna as a decoy and 13 S.C.468/2015 handed-over Rs.2,500/- to him and told him to go to Aroma Touch Parlor and confirm whether prostitution is going on there and if the information is correct, to intimate regarding the same to him. Further PW.1 has stated that, accordingly CW.4 went to the Aroma Touch Parlour, thereafter after 15 minutes, he, Panchas and his officials went to the Aroma Touch Parlour at 7.15 p.m. and conducted raid. In the hall one lady by name Meena was there and he enquired her and she told that prostitution is going on there and he asked her where is the person who has come 10-15 minutes earlier as a customer there and she has shown one room. Another person was also in the hall and he told his name as Darshan and he enquired him, he told that he came there for enjoyment by giving Rs.2,500/- to Meena, thereafter he went to the room where CW.4 went and in the said room one lady was there with CW.4 and he enquired CW.4 and he told that he has given Rs.2,500/- to Meena who is sitting in the hall and came to enjoy the lady there, thereafter he asked Meena where are the other customers and Meena has shown two rooms and he went there and in one room one person by name Vinod was there 14 S.C.468/2015 along with one lady and in another room person by name Vinay was there along with one lady and abetting to the cash counter another room was there and there person by name Selvaraj was there along with two ladies and further stated that the ladies who were with Selvaraj were the ladies who were in the room along with Vinod and Vinay. Thereafter he enquired the said ladies and they told that accused No.1 to 3 have called there stating that they will give work and involved them in the prostitution. Further this witness has stated that he has seized Rs.11,000/- cash, one Mobile and 4 Condoms from Vinay. He has also seized one Mobile each from Darshan, Vinod, Vinay and Selvaraj. Further this witness has stated that he has drawn Mahazar from 7.15 to 8.15 p.m. and obtained the signature of the Panchas and identified the Mahazar as Ex.P1 and identified the Mobile bearing Sim No.9141707723 seized by him as MO.1, identified Rs.11,000/- cash seized by him as MO.2, identified the Condoms seized by him as MO.3, identified the Nokia Mobile seized by him as MO.4, identified the Samsung Mobile seized by him as MO.5, identified the 15 S.C.468/2015 Blackberry Mobile seized by him as MO.6 and identified the Mobile bearing No.8105176124 seized by him as MO.7.
15. Further this witness has stated that thereafter he brought the said accused persons, properties seized and rescued women to Pulikeshinagar Police Station and produced them before the SHO and submitted the Report and identified the Report as Ex.P2, identified the Notice which is served on the Panchas as Ex.P3, identified the Records of Reasons as Ex.P4. This witness has been cross-examined by the counsel for the accused and in the cross-examination this witness has stated that he received the information on 24-12-2013 at 6.00 p.m. and the informants have not informed him from how many years prostitution is going on there. Further this witness in his cross-examination stated that, he received the information orally. This witness in his examination-in-chief has stated that Nagaraj-ACP has received information and he told the same to him and asked him to confirm the information and conduct raid, whereas in the cross-examination this witness has given contrary statement to that of his examination-in- chief and stated that he received information. Further Ex.P1- 16 S.C.468/2015 Mahazar and Ex.P2-Reports submitted by this witness clearly goes to show that information is received by Nagaraj-ACP and ACP has directed this witness to confirm information and conduct raid and this witness has given entirely contrary evidence to that of his examination-in-chief and the said contradiction is material one. Further this witness in the cross- examination admitted that he has seen used condoms on the spot and he has not seized the same and he has also not mentioned in the Mahazar that he has seen the used Condoms on the spot. Prosecution has not given any explanation for non-seizure of used condoms which was seen by this witness. Further this witness has stated that he has not sealed the Mobiles, cash and condoms sealed by him on the spot and this witness has not given any explanation for non-sealing the said articles. Normally if the articles are seized at the time of conducting the raid, the same will be sealed and in this case this witness has not given any explanation for non-sealing the said articles. Further this witness has stated that he cannot say the denominations of Rs.2,500/- given by him to the decoy, he cannot say what type of dresses worn by the 17 S.C.468/2015 accused-Vinay Kumar on that day. Further this witness has stated that at the time of conducting the raid he has not requested local persons for co-operating for raid. Further this witness has admitted that at the time of conducting raid, the persons who are residing in that place were not assembled. This witness in his examination-in-chief no where stated that CW.4 went to the spot and confirmed the information and intimated to him and stated that after 15 minutes of CW.4 went to the spot he and Panchas went there.
16. Prosecution examined PW.2. PW.2 is the Pancha who alleged to have accompanied the complainant for raid and he has stated that CCB Police have not called him near the spot, CCB Police have not conducted any raid, CCB Police have not catch-hold any accused persons, CCB Police have not rescued any ladies, CCB Police have not drawn any Mahazar and not seized any article in his presence. Prosecution treated this witness hostile, cross-examined him and nothing has been made out in his cross-examination so as to help the prosecution to prove the guilt of accused.
18 S.C.468/2015
17. Prosecution has examined PW.3 and PW.3 in her evidence stated that, in the year 2014 she was working as Medical Officer at Pulikeshinagar Circle of BBMP. On 06-05- 2014, his office has received requisition from Pulikeshinagar and wherein the Police have sought information whether accused No.2-Indrani has been given License to run Aroma Touch Parlor at No.39/9, Pulikeshinagara and she has verified the records of her office and intimated to Police that accused No.2 has been granted License for running Aroma Touch Parlor in the said building for the year 2013-2014 and for the year 2014-2015 the License was not renewed and till May-2014 no application for renewal received in the office and information furnished by her is identified by her as Ex.P5. This witness has been cross-examined by the counsel for the accused and this witness in the cross-examination admitted that, her office will not issue separate license for running Unisex parlor.
18. Prosecution has examined PW.4. PW.4 in his evidence stated that in the year 2013 and 2014 he was working as Police Sub-Inspector at Pulikeshinagar Police Station. On 24-12-2013 when he was in the Police Station, at 19 S.C.468/2015 about 8.45 p.m., CW.1 came to the Police Station along with 5 persons and properties seized from them and 5 rescued women and produced before him and submitted Report. On the basis of the Report he has registered case in Crime No.381/2013 and submitted FIR to the court. He has arrested the said accused persons and enquired them, they have given the voluntary statements, he has recorded the same. He has also recorded the statements of rescued women i.e., CW.5 to 9 and also he has recorded statements of CW.11 to CW.15, he has subjected the properties produced by CW.1 under P.F.3/2013. On 20-02-2014, he has recorded the statement of CW.10, thereafter handed-over the further investigation to CW.18. This witness has been cross-examined by the counsel for the accused and in the cross-examination this witness has admitted that on the next day of incident he went to the spot and at that time he has not enquired the persons who are residing abetting to the spot. Further this witness has admitted that CW.10 was not residing in the said building and this witness again admitted that in the statement recorded by him belongs to CW.10, her place of residence is shown as the 20 S.C.468/2015 said building. Further this witness has stated that he has not obtained any documents from CW.10 to show that accused No.2 has obtained the said building on rental basis.
19. Prosecution has examined PW.5 and he is the Police Inspector, he has only stated regarding taking of investigation from CW.16 and scrutinizing the investigation done by him and submitted the charge-sheet.
20. It is the specific case of the accused during the cross-examination of prosecution witness that, they have not committed any offences as alleged against them, they have been brought from their respective houses earlier to the incident and got implicated them in this case. In the present case, complainant in his evidence has given contrary statement and stated that he received information on that day at 6.00 p.m., whereas in the examination-in-chief PW.1 has stated that Nagaraj-ACP has received the information and he directed him to confirm the information and conduct raid which is contrary to the evidence of PW.1 given in the cross- examination. Further PW.1 has stated that he has not seized the used condoms which were on the spot and not given any 21 S.C.468/2015 explanation for non-seizure of the same. Further PW.1 has stated that he has not sealed the articles seized on the spot and further not given any explanation for not sealing the said articles after seizure of the same. Further PW.1 has stated that he has not put his signature and signature of the Panchas on the currency notes of Rs.2,500/- which he has handed-over to the decoy. Further pwl.1 has stated that he has not called the local persons at the time of conducting raid and drawing Mahazar and not given any explanation for not doing so. In the present case, prosecution has examined one Pancha who alleged to have been accompanied the complainant for raid as PW.2 and he turned hostile. Prosecution has not examined another Pancha who alleged to have accompanied the raid. Prosecution has not examined the rescued women who are cited as CW.5 to CW.9 in this case. Prosecution has not examined CW.4-decoy Further PW.1 no where stated that decoy went to the spot and confirmed the information and intimated to him.
21. The learned Public Prosecutor has relied upon citation reported in (2012) 1 Supreme Court Cases (Cri) 596 22 S.C.468/2015 (Case: C.Ronald and another Vs. Union Territory of Andaman), wherein the lordship of Hon'ble Apex Court have held as under;
"D. Criminal Trial - Witnesses -
Police officials/personnel/IO as witnesses - Credibility of testimony of - Held, there is no principle of law that a statement made in court by Police has to be disbelieved - In instant case, there was no evidence indicating that Policemen were deposing falsely in court since they had no enmity with accused - Submission that possibly Police had demanded some money from accused and had falsely implicated accused when they refused, neither raised at any time nor such suggestion made in cross-
examination - Hence, no entertained - Penal Code, 1860, Ss.230, 231, 232 and 239."
22. Relying upon the above cited ruling, the learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that the statement in the court by the Police cannot be disbelieved. Further learned Public Prosecutor has relied upon citation reported in ILR 2001 KAR 4655 in (Case: State of Karnataka, Hassan City Police Vs. Lokesh and others), wherein the lordship of Hon'ble Apex Court have held as under;
"(B) Criminal Trial - Proof of Discovery Panchanamas - Held - If the Panchas are not available or unreliable, the Panchanama can be proved through the evidence of Investigating Officer."23 S.C.468/2015
23. The learned Public Prosecutor relying upon the principles laid down in the above cited ruling submitted that, Panchanama can be proved through the complainant. In the present case, in view of the above mentioned contadictions and infirmities brought in the evidence of complainant-PW.1, the evidence of complainant will not prove drawing of Ex.P1- Spot cum Seizure Mahazar and seizure of MO.1 to MO.7- articles. Further in view of the infirmities and contradictions pointed out in the evidence of PW.1, his evidence itself will not prove conducting the raid. Further lordships in the above cited citation of Hon'ble Apex Court have held in that case that, "We have already demonstrated that the view taken by the learned Sessions Judge is not possible view on the state of evidence. On the contrary, we have amply demonstrated above that the learned Sessions Judge excluded from consideration the evidence which was there. He fell into grievous error in appreciation of the evidence and misdirected himself;
entertained a doubt for which there was no foundation and expressed his helplessness because the witnesses, particularly the seizure witnesses, turned hostile and refused to tell the court the truth. Attempt on his part was lacking to marshal the evidence; to remove the grain from chaff; to take the help of that part of the evidence of the hostile witnesses which supports the case of the prosecution. He commented upon 24 S.C.468/2015 insincerity of the investigating agency but did not put to use the material which was before him. We fell no hesitation in holding that the learned Sessions Judge was wrong and therefore we have reappraised the evidence and come to the conclusion indicated above."
24. The learned counsel for the accused has submitted that as per Sec.15(2) of ITP Act, at the time of conducting raid two respectable inhabitants have to be called and out of the two respectable inhabitants at least one of whom shall be a women and the same is clear from the provisions of Sec.15(2) of ITP Act. In the present case both the Panchas cited are not local persons. Further both the Panchas CW.2 and 3 are the male. CW.1 has not complied the provisions of Sec.15(2) of ITP Act. Further PW.1 in his evidence stated that after seizure of properties from the spot he brought the accused persons, properties seized and rescued women to Pulakeshinagar Police Station and produced before the SHO. Further SHO has been examined in this case as PW.4 and he has stated that he enquired the rescued women CW.5 to CW.9, recorded their statements and entrusted them to their relatives. Whereas, as per Sec.15(4) and (5), the Trafficking Police Officer after 25 S.C.468/2015 removal of rescued persons as per Sub-Sec.(4) of Sec.15 shall forthwith produce the rescued women before the appropriate Magistrate and as per Sub Sec.5(a) of Sec.15 as soon as the rescued women are produced before the Magistrate as per Sub-Sec.5 of Sec.15, shall be examined by the registered Medical Practitioner for the purpose of determination of age of such person, or for detection of any injuries as a result of sexual abuse or for the presence of any sexually transmitted diseases. In the present case, perusal of the evidence of PW.1 and 4 clearly goes to show that Trafficking Police Officer after rescuing CW.5 to CW.9 persons, he has not produced them before the Magistrate as contemplated under Sec.15(5). Further the rescued women are not produced before the Medical Practitioner for examination as contemplated under Sec.15(5)(a) of I.T.P. Act. So only evidence of PW.1 to PW.5, Ex.P1 to Ex.P7 and MO.1 to 7 will not prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. As per the well settled principles of criminal law, benefit of doubt goes to the accused and in the present case giving benefit of doubt to the accused, I hold that prosecution has utterly failed to prove the guilt of 26 S.C.468/2015 the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Hence, for the above discussion, I answer point No.1 and 2 in the NEGATIVE.
25. POINT No.3: In view of my findings point No.1, 2 and reasons stated therein, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER Acting under Sec.235(1) Cr.P.C. accused No.1- S.P.Selvaraj, accused No.3-Smt.Annamma @ Meena, accused No.4-Vinay Kumar, accused No.5-Vinu Philiks @ Vinod, accused No.6-Darshan Belliyappa are acquitted for the offences punishable under Sec.3, 4, 5, 7 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act and Sec.370 of I.P.C.
Bail bonds and surety bonds of the accused stands cancelled forthwith.
MO.1, MO.4, MO.5, MO.6 and MO.7 are the Mobiles and nobody has claimed the same, MO.2 is cash of Rs.11,000/- and no one has claimed the same, hence MO.1, MO.2, MO.4 to MO.7 are confiscated to the state after the appeal period is over.27 S.C.468/2015
MO.3 is four Condoms and the same are worthless, hence ordered to be destroyed after the appeal period is over.
(Dictated to the Judgment Writer, transcribed by her, corrected, signed and then pronounced by me in the open court on this the 17th day of April 2017).
(SHIVAJI ANANT NALAWADE) LXVIII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City.
ANNEXURE Witnesses examined for the prosecution:
PW.1 M.H.Sathish CW.1 25-07-2016
PW.2 Gopal CW.3 24-01-2017
PW.3 Dr.B.Sunitha CW.17 27-02-2017
PW.4 V.V.Dayananda CW.16 27-02-2017
PW.5 Mohammed Rafi CW.18 13-03-2017
Documents marked for the prosecution:
Ex.P1 Mahazar PW.1 25-07-2016
Ex.P1(a) Signature of PW.1 PW.1 25-07-2016
Ex.P1(b) Signature of PW.2 PW.2 24-01-2017
Ex.P2 Report/Complaint PW.1 28-09-2016
Ex.P3 Notice given to Panchas PW.1 28-09-2016
Ex.P3(a) Signature of PW.1 PW.1 28-09-2016
28 S.C.468/2015
Ex.P3(b) Signature of PW.2 PW.2 24-01-2017
Ex.P4 Record of Reasons PW.1 28-09-2016
Ex.P4(a) Signature of PW.1 PW.1 28-09-2016
Ex.P4(b) Signature of PW.2 PW.2 24-01-2017
Ex.P5 Letter written by Medical PW.3 27-02-2017
Officer, BBMP
Ex.P5(a) Signature of PW.3 PW.3 27-02-2017
Ex.P6 FIR PW.4 27-02-2017
Ex.P6(a) Signature of PW. PW.4 27-02-2017
Ex.P7 P.F. PW.4 27-02-2017
Ex.P7(a) Signature of PW.4 PW.4 27-02-2017
Material objects marked for the prosecution:
MO.1 One Samsung Mobile MO.2 Cash of Rs.11,000/- MO.3 4 Condoms MO.4 One Nokia Mobile MO.5 One Samsung Mobile MO.6 One Blackberry Mobile MO.7 One Lenovo Mobile
Witness examined documents and material objects marked for the accused:
- Nil -
LXVIII Addl. City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru City.