ORDER :

1. Leave granted. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. The question for consideration is whether the High Court was justified in quashing the proceedings against Respondent No.1 on the ground that Investigating Officer who conducted the investigation was not authorized to do so under the provisions of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 (the Act).

3. The case of the prosecution is that a raid was conducted on the night of 27th August, 2010 in a lodge and it was found that Respondent No.1 had procured minor girls and sent them for prostitution through his co-accused. He was indulging in prostitution with the aid of co-accused. After investigation, charge-sheet was filed under Sections 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 of the Act read with Sections 366A, 372 IPC read with Section 34 IPC on 20th August, 2011.

4. The Magistrate committed the case to the Sessions Court. The charges were framed on 23rd April, 2015.

5. The prosecution examined PW-1 on 14th July, 2015 but the cross-examination of PW-1 was deferred at the request of Respondent No.1.

6. Thereafter, Respondent No.1 filed an application under Section 482 Cr.PC before the High Court on the ground that Investigating Officer was n