Back
ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
Akshay Jain S/o Shri Nirmal Kumar Jain – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent
ORDER :
Anil Kumar Upman, J.
1. The instant misc. petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed on behalf of the accused petitioner for quashing of entire proceedings of criminal case No.78/18 including the order taking cognizance dated 02.11.2016, pending before learned Judicial Magistrate, District Jaipur, arising out of FIR No.479/2015 PS Sadar, Jaipur for offences under Sections 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that while conducting the search of the house in question, mandatory provision of Section 15(2) of the Act, which requires the presence of two local witnesses, was not followed, and there was violation of Section 15 (2) of the Act. He submits that as per the prosecution case, the applicant was simply a customer, and simply being a customer at any house that is being used for prostitution will not attract any penalty under the Act unless there is the involvement of the customer in the business of prostitution. He further submits that proceedings has been initiated against the petitioner in mechanical manner as the order taking cognizance dated 02.11.2016 clearly shows complete non-application of
A customer in a brothel cannot be prosecuted under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, and violations of procedural safeguards do not automatically invalidate proceedings unless prejudice is demons....
A customer found in a brothel cannot be prosecuted under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act unless involved in managing or facilitating prostitution.
Violation of Section 15(2) of the Act is irregular but not a ground for quashing the proceeding. A customer found in a brothel cannot be held liable under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act.
The act of visiting a sex worker as a customer does not constitute an offence under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, according to established legal precedents.
A customer at a brothel cannot be prosecuted under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act without evidence of involvement in procuring prostitution.
In cases where a sex worker engages in prostitution out of her free will without there being any inducement, force or coercion, it would still be a question of fact whether woman is carrying on the p....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of complying with mandatory provisions under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, the distinction between mandatory and directory p....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
