A customer at a brothel cannot be prosecuted under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act without evidence of involvement in procuring prostitution.

ORDER :

VIMAL K.VYAS, J.

1. RULE returnable forthwith. Learned APP Mr.Manan Maheta waives service of notice of rule for and behalf of the respondent no.1 – State.

2. By way of preferring the present application under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, the applicant-accused seeks to invoke the inherent powers of this Court, praying to quash and set-aside the First Information Report being C.R. No.I- 11201002240033 of 2024 registered with the C.I.D. Crime Police Station, Ahmedabad, dated 31.07.2024 and the Charge-sheet No.14 of 2025 dated 08.04.2025, which has been culminated into Criminal Case No.65969 of 2025, and subsequently committed to the Sessions Court, Ahmedabad as Sessions Case No.1262 of 2025 pending before the learned Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad, for the offences punishable under Sections 3 , 4, 5, 7 and 9 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956.

3. It is the case of the prosecution that based on the secret input received by the CID crime that an international sex trafficking and prostitution racket is being operated from New Comfort Inn Hotel, where foreign nationals from Uganda are engaged in prostitution, a trap was laid and the premises of the New Comfort Inn Hotel situated at Ahmedabad was raided on 31.07.2024. During the raid, few women from Uganda were found involved in prostitution and the present applicant- accused No.2 was arrested along with them by the police.

4. Learned advocate Mr.Nimit Shukla appearing for the applicant has submitted that the applicant was only a customer and the main accused persons are the agents and the hotel staff, who are doing illegal activities and involved in prostitution.

5. Learned advocate Mr.Shukla has further submitted that the applicant being a customer, the issue is squarely covered by the decisions rendered by this Court in the cases ofBhaliya Sureshbhai Laljibhai vs. State of Gujarat and another [Criminal Misc. Application No.13987 of 2024, decided on 17.06.2025] andVinod @ Vijay Bhagubhai Patel vs. State of Gujarat and another, reported in 2017 SCC Online Guj 446, wherein in an identical situation, this Court has quashed and set-aside the FIRs qua the applicants therein. Furthermore, in the case of Vishal Bhikhabhai Chavda vs. State of Gujarat and another [Criminal Misc. Application No.17728 of 2024, decided on 07.10.2025], this Court has quashed and set-aside the FIR qua the applicant therein. Relying upon the aforesaid decisions, learned advocate Mr.Shukla has prayed to quash and set-aside the impugned FIR as well as all other consequential proceedings arising pursuant thereto.

6. Learned APP Mr.Manan Maheta appearing for the respondent – State could not dispute the fact that the applicant has been arraigned accused in the FIR as a customer, and in similar set of facts, this Court has earlier quashed the complaints filed against other accused persons. Therefore, while opposing the present application, he has submitted to pass appropriate orders.

7. Heard learned advocates appearing for the respective parties and perused the decision relied upon by the learned advocate appearing for the applicant. It is an undisputed fact that the applicant has been arraigned accused in the FIR as a customer, when the hotel was raided. Therefore, taking into consideration the fact that the applicant- accused was a customer at the time when the raid was carried out at the hotel, it appears that the issue is squarely covered by the decisions of this Court rendered in the cases of Bhaliya Sureshbhai Laljibhai (supra) and Vinod @ Vijay Bhagubhai Patel (supra), wherein in an identical situation, this Court has quashed and set-aside the FIRs qua the applicants therein. The relevant observations made by this Court in the case of