2022 Supreme(Megh) 102
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG
W. Diengdoh, J.
LK Gracy - Appellant
Versus
State of Meghalaya - Respondent
BA No. 13 of 2022
Decided On : 30-09-2022
Mr. A. M. Bora, Sr. Adv. with Mr. D. K. Baidya, Mr. M. Prasad, Advocates., for the Petitioner; Mr. N. D. Chullai, AAG with Mr. S. Sengupta, Addl. PP, Ms. R. Colney, GA., for the Respondent
IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established is the requirement for sufficient evidence to link an accused to an alleged offence, especially in cases involving serious allegations such as running a brothel or involvement in illegal activities.
Headnote:
Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act - Arrest of accused under Sections 3/4/5/6/7 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, read with Section 370(3) IPC - Summary of Acts and Sections: Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 - Sections 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 370(3) IPC - The court discussed the provisions of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act and the accused's alleged involvement in running a brothel, emphasizing the lack of evidence linking the accused to the illegal activities and the need for further evidence in the final analysis.
Fact of the Case:
The accused, Bernard N. Marak, was arrested in connection with alleged illegal activities under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act and IPC. The petitioner, his wife, claimed his innocence, stating that he was not involved in running a brothel and was unaware of the illegal activities on his property.
Finding of the Court:
The court found insufficient evidence to link the accused to the alleged offence, emphasizing the lack of evidence that the place of occurrence was used as a brothel or for prostitution. The court granted bail to the accused with specific conditions.
Issues: The issues revolved around the accused's alleged involvement in running a brothel, the prima facie evidence against him, and the observations made by the learned Sessions Judge.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for sufficient evidence to link the accused to the alleged offence, highlighting the lack of evidence of the PO being used as a brothel or for prostitution.
Final Decision: The accused, Bernard N. Marak, was granted bail with specific conditions, as the court found insufficient evidence to link him to the alleged offence.
JUDGMENT
1. Heard Mr. A. M. Bora, learned Sr. counsel along with Mr. D. K. Baidya, learned counsel who has submitted that the petitioner herein is the wife of the accused Bernard N. Marak, who was arrested in connection with Tura Women PS Case No. 105(07) 2022 under Section 3/4/5/6/7 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, read with Section 370(3) IPC on the basis of an FIR lodged by SI F. S. Sangma of Chandmari Beat House before the Officer-in-charge Tura Women Police Station, West Garo Hills District.
2. The events which led to the arrest of the accused, husband of the petitioner emanates from a raid conducted by the police on 22.07.2022 at about 6:30 pm at Edenbari in the farm house of the accused person, popularly known as Rimpu Bagan in course of investigation in connection with Tura Women PS Case No. 24(02) 2022 under Section 366 A/376 IPC read with Section 5/6 POCSO Act.
3. In the said raid, it is said that there was a building with many rooms approximately 30 in numbers where many couples were found to have rented rooms for a night for an amount ranging from Rs. 50/- to Rs. 1500/- per room. During the raid a huge cache of India Made Foreign Liquor (IMFL) and local wine were recovered and seized from the building. A crossed bow, arrow, kukri and machete were also recovered and seized. There were also found at the place of occurrence many couples in the room and in parked vehicles in the premises in compromising manner. This led to the conclusion that a brothel was running in the said premises for the purpose of earning monetary gain to the owner. The raiding party also recovered five minor children from the PO, four of whom were boys and one girl living in a room. Altogether the police detained about 68 persons found at the Place of Occurrence (PO) which includes about 42 males and 26 females and also 5 caretakers. The 5 minor children were then handed over to the District Child Protection Unit for care and protection.
4. During the course of investigation, it was revealed that many of those who used to frequent the PO has to pay an entry fee of about Rs. 100/- after which they were allowed to use the premises for merry making including drinking of alcohol and even for indulging in sexual activities. On the basis of this investigation, the police have come to the conclusion that the PO was used as a brothel where prostitution takes place and the accused Bernand N. Marak being the owner of the property has been accused of indulging in the said illegal activities for which he was eventually arrested on 27.07.2022 being apprehended in Uttar Pradesh and was produced before the learned CJM, West Garo Hills on 28.07.2022 where he was initially remanded to police custody for 8 days and thereafter was sent to judicial custody till date.
5. The learned Sr. counsel has submitted that the accused person is innocent and in no way involved with the alleged offence. Leading this Court to the provisions of Section 3/4/5/6 and 7 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 the learned Sr. counsel has further submitted that none of the ingredients mentioned therein are attracted as far as the conduct of the accused person is concerned inasmuch as in his statement before the police, he has clearly denied the accusation that he is running a brothel in the PO and that he is also living on the earnings of prostitution. In fact, the accused person is a public figure being an elected representative of the people as a member of the District Council and has other landed properties and source of income which does not require his dependence from any alleged income from prostitution or from running a brothel at the PO.
6. The accused person has also stated that he had bought the property in question in the year 2003 and had constructed the building which was entrusted to his caretakers to run the property. The last time he had visited the PO was about two months ago and at that point of time he was not aware of any illegal activities alleged to have b