7.Learned C ounsel for the A pplicant submitted that in first and
second crime, allegations made by one small time actresses w ere
identical, as made in the present crime. Learned C ounsel vehemently
submitted that the crime in question i.e. 1097/2021 (third crime)
relates to allegations of shooting of pornographic material done in
February, 2020. It is submitted in past tw o crimes i.e. 103/2021 and
123/2021 (eventually registered w ith the same police station), all
incriminating articles have been seized including a film/ clip.
S ubmission is that since entire incriminating material has been
seized, in January, 2021, custodial interrogation of the A pplicant shall
not lead to discovery or recovery of new material. It is argued that
the Prosecution has highhandedly invoked the S ection 370 of IPC . Mr.
Yende, learned C ounsel for the A pplicant, vehemently submitted that
the allegations on the face of it, w ould not constitute offence of
‘trafficking of person’. It is submitted that the C omplainant has
presented herself in a film on ow n volition, free w ill and not pursuant
to inducement, force and coercion. Mr. Yende, learned C ounsel for
the A pplicant in support of his submission w ould rely on the
clarification issued by Justice Verma C ommission, on intent of
S ection 370 of IPC . It reads as under;
