Back
1973 Supreme(Mad) 272
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K N MUDALIAR
P. K. Unni Kumar - Appellant
Versus
State - Respondent
Case No : Criminal Revn. Case No. 748 of 1971 and Criminal Revn. Petn. No. 725 of 1971
Decided On : 24 April 1973
The prosecution must provide sufficient evidence to prove the essential elements of each offense under the Act, and corroborative evidence may be necessary to establish the credibility of witnesses.
Headnote:
Suppression of Immoral Traffic in Women and Girls Act - Convictions under Section 3(1), Section 4(1), Section 5(1)(a), Section 6(1) and Section 7(2)(b) - Section 2(a), Section 2(e), Section 2(f), Section 3(1), Section 4(1), Section 5(1)(a), Section 6(1)(a), Section 7(2)(b)
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner seeks to challenge the order of conviction under various sections of the Suppression of Immoral Traffic in Women and Girls Act, 1956. The case involves allegations of running a brothel and related offenses based on the testimony of witnesses.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the evidence presented by the prosecution was insufficient to establish the guilt of the accused for the offenses he was convicted of. The court analyzed the legal provisions and held that the prosecution failed to prove the essential elements of the alleged offenses.
Issues: The main issue was whether the evidence presented by the prosecution was sufficient to establish the guilt of the accused for the offenses under the Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for corroborative evidence and the requirement to prove specific elements of each offense under the Act. The court found that the prosecution failed to provide such evidence, leading to the acquittal of the accused.
Final Decision: The convictions of the petitioner for offenses under the Act were quashed, and the sentences were set aside. The accused was acquitted of all the offenses, and any fines paid were directed to be refunded to the petitioner-accused.
The petitioner seeks to question the correctness or propriety of the order of Court of Session, Chingleput, confirming the convictions of the petitioner for offences under Section 3(1), Section 4(1), Section 5(1)(a), Section 6(1) and Section 7(2)(b) of the Suppression of Immoral Traffic in Women and Girls Act, 1956 (Central Act 104 of 1956) and the varying terms of imprisonment awarded against the petitioner.
2. P.W. 7, K. P. Ramachandran, is the Deputy Superintendent of Police, St. Thomas Mount, and a Special Officer under the aforesaid Act. He appears to have received information on 20-7-1970 that the accused-petitioner is conducting a brothel in his house at No. 5, Second Lane, M.K.N. Road, Alandur. At about 8.30 p.m. P.W. 7 received a specific information that a teen aged girl had been brought by the accused petitioner and was kept in the aforesaid premises for the purpose of prostitution.
3. P.W. 1, Jayaraman, is a Councillor of the Alandur Municipality. P.W. 2, Selvaraj, is a resident of Adamabakkam; he is a milk vendor. On 20-7-1970, at about 8.30 p.m. P.Ws. 1 and 2 engaged themselves in a conversation and were proceeding along the road by the side of St. Thomas Road. A Police Constable beckoned them and took them to the Police Station stating that they were wanted by the Deputy Superintendent of Police (P.W. 7).
4. P.W. 7 happened to be in the room of the Inspector of Police, along with other Police officials; he gave a five rupee currency note, M.O. 1 to P.W. 1 in the presence of Selvaraj (P.W. 2) and another, after writing his signature on the same, and prepared a mahazar Ex. P. 1 attested by P.W. 2 and another. P.W. 7 then sent P.W. 1 to the house of the accused-petitioner in No. 5, Second Lane, M.K.N. Road, Alandur with some instructions and directions. As there would be delay in obtaining a warrant for search of the premises from the Magistrate concerned, P.W. 7 sent Ex. P. 3 the Sub-Divisional Magistrate of Poonamallee intimating his intention to conduct a search of the house bearing Door No. 5, Second Lane, M.K.N. Road, Alandur, under Section 15 of the Central Act 104 of 1956, as information had been laid before him that the accused-petitioner, Unni Nair, was running a brothel therein.
5. P.W. 1, after receiving M.O. 1 the five rupee currency note, from P.W. 7 went, in the meantime, to the said Door No. 5 Second Lane, M.K.N. Road, Alandur, at about 9 p.m. and found the accused petitioner inside the house sitting in the drawing room, P.W. 1 asked the accused-petitioner whether any girl was available for the purpose of prostitution. The accused-petitioner told him that a girl was available for Rs. 15/-. P.W. 1 told him that he had only Rs. 5/-. The accused petitioner received the five rupee currency note, M.O. 1 and placed it inside the pocket of his terylene shirt and showed P.W. 1 a girl whose name he mentioned as Tirupurasundari alias Latha alias Vijava, P.W. 1 took the girl inside a room in that house and had sexual intercourse with her. The door of the room had been left slightly ajar by P.W. 1 when he took the girl into that room to have carnal knowledge of her.
6. At about 9.15 p.m. P.W. 7 who had sent P.W. 1 into the house of the accused-petitioner, went to the place with his men. With Rose and P.W. 2, P.W. 7 entered the house of the accused petitioner at 9.30 p.m. The accused-petitioner was then sitting in the drawing room. In the room, on the northern side, the door was kept closed without being locked. P.W. 7 pushed open the door and found P.W. 1 and the girl Tirupurasundari in a compromising position. P.W. 7 then accosted the accused-petitioner and seized from his shirt pocket M.O. 1 the five rupee currency note under the house search list Ex. P. 2 which was attested by P.W. 2 and another. He arrested the accused-petitioner and the girl Tripurasundari. The house of the accused is situate near a hospital; in fact, the hospital is behind the house, P.W. 7 then took the accused-petitioner and Tirup
