SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Bom) 193

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
Mehroz K. Pathan, J.
Anup Ganpat Gondkar (Actual Name) - Petitioner
Versus
State of Maharashtra - Respondent
Criminal Writ Petition No. 1405 of 2025
Decided On : 17-03-2026

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. Sanket S. Kulkarni
For the Respondent: Mr. K. K. Naik

Under Section 18(1) of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, Magistrate can order preventive closure/eviction of brothel premises near public places without owner's conviction under Sections 3 or 7, after show cause notice; distinct from post-conviction Section 18(2). (32 words)

Headnote:(A) Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 - Sections 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 18(1) & 18(2) - Eviction and closure of premises used as brothel within 200 meters of public places including school, temples, residential areas and roads frequented by devotees - Action under Section 18(1) preventive, exercisable by Magistrate without conviction under Section 3 or 7 after show cause notice based on police inquiry report - Distinct from Section 18(2) by convicting court post-conviction without notice - Prior single judge decision erroneously requiring conviction for Section 18(1) not followed, Supreme Court holding Section 18(1) summary procedure for moral sanitation. (Paras 14-15, 18-22, 24)

(B) Principles of natural justice - Multiple notices served by police and authority with acknowledgments, no response despite opportunities - Claim of medical inability unsubstantiated - Principles complied with. (Para 13)

(C) Owner/landlord liability - Premises given on leave and licence, but owners named in FIR as running brothel, properly noticed along with occupier - Absence of notice to licensee does not vitiate order. (Para 16)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners challenged eviction and one-year closure order of their hotel premises passed under Section 18(1) following FIR for prostitution racket operated under guise of spa centre. Raid with decoy customer, panch witnesses uncovered women, mobile handsets, condoms packets, marked currency from receptionist who named owner. Police report detailed proximity to school 100-150m away, adjacent temples, residential colonies, public road. Three show cause notices served, no reply filed.

Findings of Court:
Impugned order just and proper; sufficient basis in police report for Section 7 violation; natural justice followed; no conviction needed for Section 18(1).

Issues: Whether natural justice violated due to non-response; whether evidence inadequate for proximity to public place under Section 7; whether licensee must be impleaded; whether conviction under Section 3 or 7 prerequisite for Section 18(1).

Ratio Decidendi: Section 18(1) empowers Magistrate for temporary closure/eviction as preventive measure based on information of brothel use near sensitive public places, after opportunity to owners; conviction mandatory only for Section 18(2); police report adequately establishes violation absent rebuttal.

Result: Writ petition dismissed.

Table of Content
1. police raid uncovers prostitution at hotel spa near public places. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5)
2. multiple notices served; natural justice principles complied with. (Para 6 , 13)
3. premises within 200m of school, temples, violating section 7 pita. (Para 7 , 8 , 14 , 15)
4. notice to owners sufficient under section 18(1); licensee irrelevant. (Para 9 , 16)
5. section 18(1) allows closure without conviction under sections 3/7. (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24)
6. writ petition dismissed; closure order upheld. (Para 25)

JUDGMENT :

MEHROZ K. PATHAN, J.

1. The Petitioners have filed the present petition challenging the order dated 21.07.2025 passed by the Sub- Divisional Magistrate, Shirdi, whereby the Petitioners were evicted from the premises owned by them in exercise of powers under Section 18 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘PITA Act’), and the premises of Hotel Shirdi Sai Inn were directed to be closed for a period of one year.

FACTS :

2. An FIR bearing No. 1112/2023 is registered with the Shirdi Police Station, Ahilyanagar on 21/12/2023 under Sections 3, 4, 5, 7 and 8 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956. In the FIR it is alleged that the Informant is serving as a Police Constable at Shirdi Police Station. On 21.12.2023, Police Inspector Sopan Shirsath called the Informant along with other police personnel and informed them that Superintendent of Police, Shirdi Division, Shri Sandip Mitke had received confidential information that within the jurisdiction of Shirdi Police Station, at a hotel on Pimpalwadi Road, an individual was running a prostitution racket under the guise of a "Spa Centre." It is alleged that, acting on this information, Police Inspector Shirsath summoned two panch witnesses, namely Bhausahib Arjun Bade and Siddharth Bharat Surana. Thereafter, he also summoned one person, Vishal Shivprasad Verma, to act as a decoy customer. It is alleged that Police Inspector Shirsath handed over Rs. 500/-in four currency notes to the decoy customer and instructed him to hand over the said money to the person conducting prostitution in the name of Spa Centre, demand a woman for sexual intercourse, and after obtaining such a woman, give a missed call to him. It is alleged that Police Inspector Shirsath, along with the police staff, both panch witnesses, and the decoy customer, proceeded in a government vehicle and one private vehicle, carrying a laptop, printer, and other material required for preparing the panchanama. It is alleged that at Pimpalwadi, Dattanagar, the vehicles were halted and the decoy customer was sent inside Hotel Sai Inn, where the Spa Centre was allegedly being operated. After about 15 minutes, Police Inspector Shirsath received a missed call from the decoy customer.

. It is alleged that, at around 16:25 hrs, the police staff along with the panch witnesses entered Hotel Sai Inn, Pimpalwadi Road, Shirdi. Inside, one woman was found sitting, who on inquiry in the presence of panch witnesses disclosed her name as Sheetal Hardik Chaudhary. She was informed about the purpose of the search. On further checking, in one of the rooms, the decoy customer was found with another woman, who disclosed her name as Nuri Mehbub Syed, resident of Chitta Camp, Karbala Maidan, D-Sector, F-Line Slum, Khadi, Mankhurd East, Mumbai, and working at the Spa Centre. On her person, one mobile handset was recovered, and under the bed, four packets of Manforce brand condoms were found.

3. It is alleged that, upon further search of the premises, three more women were found, namely:

1. Shabana Salimuddin Shaikh, age 30, resident of Garib Nagar Slum, Room No. 26, Bandra East, Mumbai.

2. Ruksar Imran Ansari, age 24, resident of Nehru Nagar Chawl, near Anjuman High School, Kurla East, Mumbai.

3. Ganga Gorakhnath Khandare, age 33, resident of Akhada Balapur, Taluka Kalamnuri, District Hingoli.

. It is alleged that from each of them one mobile handset was recov

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top