Absence of exploitation renders trafficking charges unsustainable under IPC, as per judicial precedents.

ORAL ORDER

1. Respondent No.2 lodged an FIR alleging that accused No.3, who is the biological mother of the child, handed over the child to accused Nos.1 and 2 to take care of. Based on this complaint, the police registered FIR No.52/2023 for offences punishable under Sections 370 , 317 , 363 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code ( IPC ).

2. Section 370 IPC – Trafficking of Persons:

Section 370 IPC defines trafficking as the recruitment, transportation, harboring, transfer, or receipt of persons by means such as threats, force, coercion, abduction, fraud, deception, abuse of power, or inducement, for the purpose of exploitation.

Exploitation under this section includes physical or sexual exploitation, slavery or practices akin to slavery, servitude, or forced removal of organs. The consent of the victim is immaterial in determining the offence of trafficking.

Punishments for trafficking range from rigorous imprisonment of not less than seven years to life imprisonment, depending on the circumstances, such as whether the trafficking involved minors or multiple victims.

3. The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Crl.P.No.6118/2021 (disposed of on 23.03.2022) held that the essence of Section 370 IPC lies in the element of exploitation. In the absence of any allegation of exploitation, the offence under Section 370 IPC cannot be sustained.

4. In the present case, there is no allegation by the complainant or the victim that the petitioners—accused Nos.1 and 2—

subjected the child to exploitation as required under Section 370 IPC .

5. Furthermore, Section 363 IPC , which pertains to the kidnapping of a minor, is also not attracted in this case. The biological mother of the child voluntarily, and of her own free will, handed over the custody of the child to accused Nos.1 and 2.

6. As a result, the essential ingredients necessary to constitute the alleged offences against the petitioners—accused Nos.1 and 2—are absent.

7. The continuation of the investigation in this matter, despite the absence of essential elements to support the alleged offences, would amount to an abuse of the process of law.

8. In view of the above, this petition is allowed, and the FIR and all consequential proceedings against the petitioners—accused Nos.1 and 2—are hereby quashed. Accordingly, I pass the following:

ORDER i) The Criminal petition is allowed ii) The impugned FIR in Crime No.52/2023 registered by Kasabapeth Police Station, Hubballi insofar it relates to the petitioners-accused No.1 and 2 is hereby quashed.