Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

9. It was further submitted that the application under Section 216 of the Cr.P.C. moved by the petitioner was on the same grounds which were urged before the Learned Trial Court at the time of arguments on charge. It is also submitted that no reliance was placed on the testimony recorded of the petitioner before the Learned Trial Court seeking addition of charge under Section 370 IPC as no material had come on record for the same. It is further submitted that the allegations as contained in the FIR and the material brought on record by way of chargesheet does not make out a case under Section 370 of the IPC.

20. Section 370 of the IPC, reads as under:

"Section 370 IPC - Trafficking of persons
370. (1) Whoever, for the purpose of exploitation, (a) recruits, (b) transports,
(c) harbours, (d) transfers, or (e) receives, a person or persons, by--

First.-- using threats, or Secondly.-- using force, or any other form of coercion, or Thirdly.-- by abduction, or Fourthly.-- by practising fraud, or deception, or Fifthly.-- by abuse of power, or Sixthly.-- by inducement, including the giving or receiving of payments or benefits, in order to achieve the consent of any person having control over the person recruited, transported, harboured, transferred or received, commits the offence of trafficking.

Thus, the heading of erstwhile Section 370 of the IPC "Buying or disposing of any person as a slave' had been substituted by "Trafficking of person."

22. The present new Section 370 of the IPC essentially deals with the heinous offence of trafficking of a person. It is pertinent to note that the aforesaid substitution of Section 370 of the IPC was made after the recommendation made SINGH RAWAT CRL.REV.P. 882/2019 Signing Date:05.09.2024 17:55:39 in the report of the Committee of amendment of Criminal Law by Justice J.S. Verma dated 23.01.2013. The following extract from the said recommendation relevant for the present case is as under:

24. The core or essential ingredient would be "for the purpose of exploitation". Thus, to bring the case of respondents no. 2 to 5 under Section 370 of the IPC, it SINGH RAWAT CRL.REV.P. 882/2019 Signing Date:05.09.2024 17:55:39 has to be shown that they "for the purpose of exploitation" by using the aforesaid methods, recruited or transported or harboured or received the petitioner. To charge respondents no. 2 to 5, for the offence punishable under Section 370 IPC it has to be prima facie shown that they had employed the petitioner for the said "purposes of exploitation". As pointed out hereinabove, the petitioner herself stated in the FIR that she was brought by one Fagu from her village to the house of the said respondents. It has further come on record that the salary was being transferred to her father's account. Similarly, the fact that Aadhar Card was made showing her to be of the eligible age for obtaining employment had also been prepared, and has come on record. The aforesaid Fagu is also not an accused in the present FIR. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Gujarat v. Sandip Omprakash Gupta, 2022 SCC Online SC 1727, had observed and held as under: