Sri Lingaraju V S vs The State Of Karnataka on 1 February, 2019

[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Sri Lingaraju V S vs The State Of Karnataka on 1 February, 2019

Bench: P.S. Dinesh Kumar

                             1

                                          CRL.P. NO.867/2018



     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

       DATED THIS THE 1ST DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2019

                          BEFORE

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

           CRIMINAL PETITION No.867 OF 2018

BETWEEN:

1.   SRI LINGARAJU V.S.
     S/O SWAMIGOWDA B
     AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS
     SHETTIHALLI, KASABA HOBLI
     PANDAVAPURA (TQ)
     MANDYA DISTRICT.

2.   SRI RAVI @ RAVIKUMAR
     MAJOR
     OWNER OF THE ARYAN RESIDENCY LODGE
     RAJAJINAGARA
     BENGALURU CITY
     BENGALURU - 10.

3.   YOGESH
     MAJOR
     CASHIER OF ARYAN
     RESIDENCY LODGE
     NO.969/29, 41 STC
     RAJAJINAGARA
     BENGALURU - 10.

4.   SRI JAYANTH
     S/O SHIVARAMU
     AGED 23 YEARS
     AJJEGOWDANA PALYA
     KOTHAGERE
     HOBLI, KUNIGAL
     TUMKUR (TQ)

5.   SRI NITHIN L
     S/O LINGAIAH
     AGED 33 YEARS
     NO.206, 60FT ROAD
     SHIVANAGARA
                                 2

                                           CRL.P. NO.867/2018

       RAJAJINAGARA
       BENGALURU - 10                           ... PETITIONERS

(BY SHRI D. MOHANKUMARA, ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA
BY RAJAJINAGAR P.S
REP. BY HCGP
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
BENGALURU - 560 001                             ... RESPONDENT

(BY SHRI NASRULLA KHAN, HCGP)


       THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF
CR.P.C., PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR AND ENTIRE PROCCEDINGS IN
CRIME NO.204/2017 PENDING ON THE FILE OF IX A.C.M.M., BANGALORE
FOR THE ALLEGED OFFENCES P/U/S 3, 4, 5 AND 7 OF IMMORAL TRAFFIC
PREVENTION ACT AND SECTION 370 OF IPC WITH RESPECT OF THE
PETITIONERS HEREIN.


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

                           ORDER

Heard Shri D. Mohankumara, learned advocate for the petitioners and Shri Nasrulla Khan, learned HCGP for the State.

2. Learned advocate for the petitioners has filed a memo of even date seeking leave of this Court to withdraw the petition so far as petitioners No.1, 2 and 3 are concerned, with liberty to urge all contentions in a 3 CRL.P. NO.867/2018 discharge application, which they propose to file before the learned Trial Judge. Memo be kept in record.

3. So far as petitioners No.4 and 5 are concerned, learned advocate for the petitioners, adverting to the FIR, submits that they are customers in a brothel house. Therefore, the said penal provisions of the Act are not attracted against them.

4. Shri Nasrulla Khan, learned HCGP does not dispute the submission of the learned advocate for the petitioners so far as petitioners No.4 and 5 are concerned.

5. 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)].

6. In the circumstances, following the said decision, this petition is dismissed as withdrawn so far as petitioners 4 CRL.P. NO.867/2018 No.1, 2 and 3 are concerned with liberty as sought for. The petition is allowed so far as petitioners No.4 and 5 are concerned. The criminal proceedings arising out of FIR No.204/2017 pending on the file of IX Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, initiated against them are quashed accordingly.

No costs.

Sd/-

JUDGE AV

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Karnataka High Court