Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 11TH DAY OF MARCH, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE S VISHWAJITH SHETTY CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 12936 OF 2023 BETWEEN:
SANJAY KUMAR, S/O NAKSHTHRAMAL, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, NO. 63/3, NEW GUDDADAHALLI, MYSORE ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 026.
…PETITIONER (BY SRI. VISHWANATH M.P., ADVOCATE)
Digitally AND:
signed by V KRISHNA THE STATE BY Location: High YESHWANTHAPURA POLICE STATION, Court of BENGALURU, Karnataka REP. BY SPP, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU - 560 001.
…RESPONDENT (BY SRI. B.N. JAGADEESH, ADDL. SPP ALONG WITH SRI.R.RANGASWAMY, HCGP)
THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST THE PETITIONER ABOVE NAMED IN S.C.NO.741/2023 (CR.NO.134/2020) OF RESPONDENT YESHWANTHPUR POLICE STATION, REGISTERED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S.370 OF IPC AND SEC.3,4,5,6,7 OF ITP ACT, PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED LXXI ACC AND SJ, BENGALURU (CCH-72).
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner is before this Court under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., with a prayer to quash the entire proceedings in S.C.No.741/2023 pending before the LXXI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge (CCH-72), Bengaluru arising out of Crime No.134/2020 registered by Yeshwanthapura Police Station, Bengaluru City for the offences punishable under Section 370 of IPC and Sections 3, 4, 5 6 and 7 of Immoral Traffic Prevention Act, 1956.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that perusal of the F.I.R., as well as the charge sheet would go to show that petitioner is only a customer who was present in the premises where the alleged offences had taken place. He submits that the provisions of the Immoral Traffic Prevention Act does not make out any offence as against the customer. He submits that this Court has already considered this aspect of the matter and has held that the customer cannot be prosecuted for the offences under the provision of the Immoral Traffic Prevention Act, 1956.
4. Learned Additional SPP who appears for the respondent does not dispute the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
5. Submissions made by both the counsel are placed on record.
6. Material on record would clearly go to show that petitioner was only a customer who was present in the premises when the raid was conducted. This Court in the case of 'Bharath S.P., vs State of Karnataka and another in Crl.P.No.1757/2022 has held that proceedings cannot be initiated against the customer for offences under the provisions of Immoral Traffic Act, 1956. Under these circumstances, I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER Criminal Petition is allowed.
The entire proceedings in S.C.No.741/2023 pending before the LXXI Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge (CCH-72), Bengaluru arising out of Crime No.134/2020 registered by Yeshwanthapura Police Station, Bengaluru City, for the offences punishable under Section 370 of IPC and Sections 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 of Immoral Traffic Prevention Act, 1956 is hereby quashed as against the petitioner only.
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
