Partly allowed

Srikanth v. State of Karnataka by Psi

Karnataka HC25 Nov 2024CRL.P/2095/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Karnataka allowed a criminal petition to quash proceedings against two accused. Proceedings against the first two accused were withdrawn. Proceedings against the customer (3rd) and the ignorant landlord (4th) were quashed, holding such charges unsustainable against them under the relevant Act.

What did the court decide?

The criminal petition was allowed. Proceedings billed in C.C.No.1406/2022 insofar as the customer and the ignorant owner were concerned were quashed.

Srikanth Vs State of Karnataka by Psi — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2024:KHC:47952 CRL.P No. 2095 of 2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 25^TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶6

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 2095 OF 2023

¶7

BETWEEN:

¶8

SRIKANTH S/O RAVINDRA SHETTY, AGED ABOUT 40 YEARS, CHANUKYA LODGE, HARIHARA CITY. RESIDENT OF NO.84, NILUVAGILU VILLAGE, KOPPA TALUK, CHIKKAMAGALURU DISTRICT.

¶9

Digitally signed by KAVYA G Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶10

MANJUNATHA @ MANJUNATHA GOWDA V.G., S/O HALANAGOWDA, AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS, RESIDENT OF ITTIGUDI VILLAGE, HARAPANAHALLI TALUK, BALLARI

¶11

LOKESHAPPA @ DEVAJJU LOKESHAPPA, S/O THOTAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, RESIDENT OF HARALAHALLI VILLAGE, HARIHARA TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT.

¶12

¶13

NC: 2024:KHC:47952 CRL.P No. 2095 of 2023

¶14

MURUGESH T.J., S/O JAYADEVAPPA T., AGED ABOUT 75 YEARS, RESIDENT OF NO.570, P.B. ROAD, VAGEES NAGARA, PRESENT AT DODDIBELE, HARIHARA CITY, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT.

¶15

…PETITIONERS

¶16

(BY SRI. HIREMATHAD MAHESHIAH RUDRAYYA, ADVOCATE)

¶17

AND:

¶18

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY PSI, HARIHARA TOWN POLICE STATION, HARIHARA-577 213, REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT BUILDINGS, BENGALURU-560 001

¶19

…RESPONDENT

¶20

(BY SMT. RASHMI PATIL, HCGP)

¶21

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C PRAYING TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET NO.86/2021 (ARISING ON FIR IN CR.NO.167/2021) FILED BY Ist RESPONDENT HARIHARA POLICE ON THE FILE OF THE LEARNED Ist ADDITIONAL CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC COURT HARIHARA, P/U/S.370,109,34 OF IPC R/W SEC.3,4,5,6 OF IMMORAL TRAFFIC PREVENTION ACT 1956 CONSEQUENTLY QUASH THE CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.1406/2022.

¶22

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY,

¶23

ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶24

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:47952 CRL.P No. 2095 of 2023

¶25

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M.NAGAPRASANNA

¶26

ORAL ORDER

¶27

Heard the learned counsel Sri.Hiremathad Maheshiah Rudrayya, appearing for the petitioners and the learned High Court Government Pleader Smt.Rashmi Patil, appearing for the respondent.

¶28

Petitioners - accused Nos.1 to 4 are knocking at the doors of this Court calling in question the proceedings in C.C.No.1406/2022 pending on the file of the I Additional Civil Judge and J.M.F.C., Harihara.

¶29

Insofar as petitioner Nos.1 and 2 - accused Nos.1 and 2 are concerned, they are the lessee and the room boy of the lodge in which the alleged acts of prostitution were taking place and therefore, have become an offence under the Provisions of Immoral Traffic Prevention Act, 1956. Insofar as petitioner Nos.3 and 4 - accused Nos.3 and 4 are concerned,

¶30

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:47952 CRL.P No. 2095 of 2023

¶31

accused No.3 is the customer against whom the proceedings cannot be permitted to continue, in the light of plethora of judgments rendered by this Court and the coordinate Benches of this Court and petitioner No.4 is the owner of the property, who has leased out to the lessee and is not aware of what is happening in the lodge.

¶32

At this juncture, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that he would withdraw the petition insofar as petitioner Nos.1 and 2 are concerned.

¶33

Therefore, petitioner Nos.1 and 2 - accused Nos.1 and 2 shall face trial and come out clean in a full blown trial.

¶34

Insofar as petitioner Nos.3 and 4, as observed hereinabove, one is a customer against whom the proceedings cannot be permitted to be continued in the light of the judgment of this Court in the case of BARATH S.P. v. STATE OF KARNATAKA in Crl.P.No.1757/2022 disposed on 24.03.2022, wherein this Court has held as follows:

¶35

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:47952 CRL.P No. 2095 of 2023

¶36

“7. The afore-narrated facts are not in dispute. The proceedings against the accused are pending consideration in the aforesaid C.C.No.109 of 2018 where the petitioner is accused No.4. The petitioner is arrayed as accused for the reason that he was caught as a customer in the brothel when the search or raid took place on 2409-2015 and the proceedings are instituted for offences punishable under Sections 3 to 6 of the Act and Section 370(3) of the IPC. It is germane to notice Sections 3 to 6 of the Act and they read as follows:

¶37

“3. Punishment for keeping a brothel or allowing premises to be used as a brothel .—(1) Any person who keeps or manages, or acts or assists in the keeping or management of, a brothel shall be punishable on first conviction with rigorous imprisonment for a term of not less than one year and not more than three years and also with fine which may extend to two thousand rupees and in the event of a second or subsequent conviction, with rigorous imprisonment for a term of not less than two years and not more than five years and also with fine which may extend to two thousand rupees.

¶38

(2) Any person who—

¶39

(a) being the tenant, lessee, occupier or person in charge of any premises, uses, or knowingly allows any other person to use, such premises or any part thereof as a brothel, or

¶40

(b) being the owner, lessor or landlord of any premises or the agent of such owner, lessor or landlord, lets the same or any part thereof with the knowledge that the same or any part thereof is intended to be used as a brothel, or is willfully a party to the use of such premises or any part thereof as a brothel, shall be punishable on first conviction with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years and with fine which may extend to two thousand rupees and in the event of a second or subsequent conviction, with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to five years and also with fine.

¶41

¶42

NC: 2024:KHC:47952 CRL.P No. 2095 of 2023

¶43

2A. For the purposes of sub-section (2), it shall be presumed, until the contrary is proved, that any person referred to in clause (a) or clause (b) of that sub-section, is knowingly allowing the premises or any part thereof to be used as a brothel or, as the case may be, has knowledge that the premises or any part thereof are being used as a brothel, if, -

¶44

(a) a report is published in a newspaper having circulation in the area in which such person resides to the effect that the premises or any part thereof have been found to be used for prostitution as a result of a search made under this Act; or (b) a copy of the list of all things found during the search referred to in clause (a) is given to such person.

¶45

(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, on conviction of any person referred to in clause (a) or clause (b) of sub-section (2) of any offence under that subsection in respect of any premises or any part thereof, any lease or agreement under which such premises have been leased out or are held or occupied at the time of the commission of the offence, shall become void and inoperative with effect from the date of the said conviction.

¶46

Punishment for living on the earnings of prostitution .—(1) Any person over the age of eighteen years who knowingly lives, wholly or in part, on the earnings of the prostitution of any other person shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine which may extend to one thousand rupees, or with both and where such earnings relate to the prostitution of a child or a minor, shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term of not less than seven years and not more than ten years.

¶47

(2) Where any person over the age of eighteen years is proved—

¶48

(a) to be living with, or to be habitually in the company of, a prostitute; or

¶49

¶50

NC: 2024:KHC:47952 CRL.P No. 2095 of 2023

¶51

(b) to have exercised control, direction or influence over the movements of a prostitute in such a manner as to show that such person is aiding, abetting or compelling her prostitution; or

¶52

(c) to be acting as a tout or pimp on behalf of a prostitute, it shall be presumed, until the contrary is proved, that such person is knowingly living on the earnings of prostitution of another person within the meaning of sub-section (1).

¶53

5. Procuring, inducing or taking person for the sake of prostitution. —(1) any person who—

¶54

(a) procures or attempts to procure a person, whether with or without his consent, for the purpose of prostitution; or

¶55

(b) induces a person to go from any place, with the intent that he may for the purpose of prostitution become the inmate of, or frequent, a brothel; or

¶56

(c) takes or attempts to take a person, or causes a person to be taken, from one place to another with a view to his carrying on, or being brought up to carry on prostitution; or

¶57

(d) causes or induces a person to carry on prostitution;

¶58

shall be punishable on conviction with rigorous imprisonment for a term of not less than three years and not more than seven years and also with fine which may extend to two thousand rupees and if any offence under this sub-section is committed against the will of any person, the punishment of imprisonment for a term of seven years shall extend to imprisonment for a term of fourteen years:

¶59

Provided that if the person in respect of whom an offence committed under this sub-section,—

¶60

(i) is a child, the punishment provided under this sub-section shall extend to rigorous imprisonment for a term of not less than seven years but may extend to life; and

¶61

¶62

NC: 2024:KHC:47952 CRL.P No. 2095 of 2023

¶63

(ii) is a minor, the punishment provided under this sub-section shall extend to rigorous imprisonment for a term of not less than seven years and not more than fourteen years;

¶64

(3) An offence under this section shall be triable—

¶65

(a) in the place from which a person is procured, induced to go, taken or caused to be taken or from which an attempt to procure or take such person is made; or

¶66

(b) in the place to which he may have gone as a result of the inducement or to which he is taken or caused to be taken or an attempt to take him is made.

¶67

Detaining a person in premises where prostitution is carried on .—(1) Any person who detains any other person, whether with or without his consent,—

¶68

(a) in any brothel, or

¶69

(b) in or upon any premises with intent that such person may have sexual intercourse with a person who is not the spouse of such person,

¶70

shall be punishable on conviction, with imprisonment of either description for a term which shall not be less than seven years but which may be for life or for a term which may extend to ten years and shall also be liable to fine:

¶71

Provided that the court may, for adequate and special reasons to be mentioned in the judgment, impose a sentence of imprisonment for a term of less than seven years.

¶72

(2) Where any person is found with a child in a brothel, it shall be presumed, unless the contrary is proved, that he has committed an offence under sub-section (1).

¶73

(2A) Where a child or minor found in a brothel, is, on medical examination, detected to have been sexually abused, it shall be presumed, unless the

¶74

¶75

NC: 2024:KHC:47952 CRL.P No. 2095 of 2023

¶76

contrary is proved, that the child or minor has been detained for purposes of prostitution or, as the case may be, has been sexually exploited for commercial purposes.

¶77

(3) A person shall be presumed to detain a woman or girl in a brothel or in or upon any premises for the purpose of sexual intercourse with a man other than her lawful husband, if such person, with intent to compel or induce her to remain there,—

¶78

(a) withholds from her any jewellery, wearing apparel, money or other property belonging to her, or

¶79

(b) threatens her with legal proceedings if she takes away with her any jewellery, wearing apparel, money or other property lent or supplied to her by or by the direction of such person.

¶80

(4) Notwithstanding any law to the contrary, no suit, prosecution or other legal proceeding shall lie against such woman or girl at the instance of the person by whom she has been detained, for the recovery of any jewellery, wearing apparel or other property alleged to have been lent or supplied to or for such woman or girl or to have been pledged by such woman or girl or for the recovery of any money alleged to be payable by such woman or girl.”

¶81

None of the provisions get attracted against a customer as he neither keeps a brothel or allows the premises to be used as brothel as obtaining under Section 3 of the Act; he does not live on the earnings of the prostitution as obtaining under Section 4 of the Act; he cannot be alleged of procuring, inducing or taking a person for the sake of prostitution; he cannot also be alleged of detaining a person in the premises where prostitution is carried on. The allegation against the petitioner is the ones punishable under the aforesaid provisions, which are on the face of it, is inapplicable to the case at hand.

¶82

10 -

¶83

NC: 2024:KHC:47952 CRL.P No. 2095 of 2023

¶84

The other offence alleged against the petitioner is the one punishable under Section 370 of the IPC. Section 370 of the IPC reads as follows:

¶85

“370. Trafficking of person : (1) Whoever, for the purpose of exploitation, (a) recruits, (b) transports, (c) harbours, (d) transfers, or (e) receives, a person or persons, by—

¶86

First.—using threats, or

¶87

Secondly.—using force, or any other form of coercion, or

¶88

Thirdly.—by abduction, or

¶89

Fourthly.—by practising fraud, or deception, or

¶90

Fifthly.—by abuse of power, or

¶91

Sixthly.—by inducement, including the giving or receiving of payments or benefits, in order to achieve the consent of any person having control over the person recruited, transported, harboured, transferred or received, commits the offence of trafficking.

¶92

Explanation 1.—The expression “exploitation” shall include any act of physical exploitation or any form of sexual exploitation, slavery or practices similar to slavery, servitude, or the forced removal of organs. Explanation 2.—The consent of the victim is immaterial in determination of the offence of trafficking.

¶93

(2) Whoever commits the offence of trafficking shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than seven years, but which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.

¶94

(3) Where the offence involves the trafficking of more than one person, it shall be punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than ten years but which may extend to imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine.

¶95

11 -

¶96

NC: 2024:KHC:47952 CRL.P No. 2095 of 2023

¶97

(4) Where the offence involves the trafficking of a minor, it shall be punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than ten years, but which may extend to imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine.

¶98

(5) Where the offence involves the trafficking of more than one minor, it shall be punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than fourteen years, but which may extend to imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine.

¶99

(6) If a person is convicted of the offence of trafficking of minor on more than one occasion, then such person shall be punished with imprisonment for life, which shall mean imprisonment for the remainder of that person's natural life, and shall also be liable to fine.

¶100

(7) When a public servant or a police officer is involved in the trafficking of any person then, such public servant or police officer shall be punished with imprisonment for life, which shall mean imprisonment for the remainder of that person's natural life, and shall also be liable to fine.”

¶101

Section 370 of the IPC deals with offences punishable for buying or disposing any person as a slave, which is not the allegation and the incident would not link the petitioner to the said offences. Therefore, on both these counts the proceedings are rendered unsustainable.

¶102

For the aforesaid reasons, the following:

¶103

ORDER

¶104

i) Criminal Petition is allowed.

¶105

(ii) The proceedings in C.C.No.109 of 2018 pending before the JMFC (II Court), Mysuru, stand quashed.”

¶106

12 -

¶107

NC: 2024:KHC:47952 CRL.P No. 2095 of 2023

¶108

and accused No.4 is the owner of the property against whom the proceedings cannot be permitted to be continued in the light of the judgment of this Court in the case of

¶109

SRI PRABHURAJ VS. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA in Crl.P.No.415/2022 disposed on 08.03.2022, wherein this Court has held as follows:

¶110

" 3. Brief facts leading to the filing of the present petition, as borne out from the pleadings, are as follows:

¶111

The petitioner is the owner of residential premises bearing No.16, Shivagiri Nilaya, Nagarabhavi, 6^th cross, Coconut Garden, Bengaluru. Petitioner lets out the premises to accused No.1, pursuant to a rent agreement entered into between the parties on 11.12.2019. A search is conducted by the police on 25.01.2020 on the premises where the tenant-accused No.1 was residing and finds that the accused No.1 was running a brothel. Pursuant to the said search, a crime is registered against the petitioner and others for offences punishable under Sections 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the Act and under Section 370 of the IPC. The petitioner being the owner of the premises was issued a notice on 29.01.2020 to which the petitioner replies on 31.1.2020, explaining the circumstances of him being not aware of what activities happening in the house which he has rented it out. The police, after investigation, have filed charge sheet in the matter against the petitioner as well for the offence punishable under Section 3 of the Act. It is at that juncture the petitioner knocks the doors of this Court in the subject writ petition.

¶112

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in terms of the said Act, the petitioner cannot be hauled into criminal proceedings, as he was owner of the premises and the activities happening in the premises which was rented by him to accused No.1 was not within

¶113

13 -

¶114

NC: 2024:KHC:47952 CRL.P No. 2095 of 2023

¶115

his knowledge as he was staying far away from such premises.

¶116

Learned High Court Government Pleader would submit that the petitioner being the owner is definitely to be brought into trial in terms of Section 3 of the Act and would seek to justify the action of the police in filing the charge sheet even against the petitioner.

¶117

I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record.

¶118

The afore-narrated facts are not being in dispute are not reiterated. Search was conducted on the premises that the petitioner owned and rented out to accused No.1 on 25.01.2020 and case is registered for the offences punishable under Sections3, 4, 5 and 6 of the said Act. It is germane to notice Section 3 of the Act for consideration of the case of the petitioner, which reads as under:

¶119

“3. Punishment for keeping a brothel or allowing premises to be used as a brothel .—(1) Any person who keeps or manages, or acts or assists in the keeping or management of, a brothel, shall be punishable on first conviction with rigorous imprisonment for a term of not less than one year and not more than three years and also with fine which may extend to two thousand rupees and in the event of a second or subsequent conviction, with rigorous imprisonment for a term of not less than two years and not more than five years and also with fine which may extend to two thousand rupees.

¶120

(2) Any person who—

¶121

(a) being the tenant, lessee, occupier or person in charge of any premises, uses, or knowingly allows

¶122

14 -

¶123

NC: 2024:KHC:47952 CRL.P No. 2095 of 2023

¶124

any other person to use, such premises or any part thereof as a brothel, or

¶125

(b) being the owner, lessor or landlord of any premises or the agent of such owner, lessor or landlord, lets the same or any part thereof with the knowledge that the same or any part thereof is intended to be used as a brothel, or is wilfully a party to the use of such premises or any part thereof as a brothel, shall be punishable on first conviction with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years and with fine which may extend to two thousand rupees and in the event of a second or subsequent conviction, with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to five years and also with fine.

¶126

[(2-A) For the purposes of sub-section (2), it shall be presumed, until the contrary is proved, that any person referred to in clause (a) or clause (b) of that sub-section, is knowingly allowing the premises or any part thereof to be used as a brothel or, as the case may be, has knowledge that the premises or any part thereof are being used as a brothel, if,—

¶127

¶128

(b) a copy of the list of all things found during the search referred to in clause (a) is given to such person].

¶129

(3) Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force, on conviction of any person referred to in clause (a) or clause (b) of sub-section (2) of any offence under that sub-section in respect of any premises or any part thereof, any lease or agreement under which such premises have been leased out or are held or occupied at the time of the commission of the offence, shall become void and inoperative with effect from the date of the said conviction.”

¶130

(Emphasis supplied)

¶131

15 -

¶132

NC: 2024:KHC:47952 CRL.P No. 2095 of 2023

¶133

Section 3(2)(b) of the Act directs that the owner, lessor or landlord of any premises having knowledge of what is happening in the premises, would be brought within the ambit of the offences punishable under Section 3 of the Act. Pursuant to the said search, a notice is issued to the petitioner on 29.01.2020 alleging the aforesaid offences against the petitioner, to which, the petitioner gives his reply clearly narrating that he is not aware of what is happening in the premises that he had rented it out and stayed far away. The police also while filing the charge sheet indicates the same.

¶134

In the light of Section 3(2)(b) of the Act and the police themselves acknowledging that petitioner was not aware as to what was happening in the premises, permitting further proceedings to continue against the petitioner would degenerate into harassment and become an abuse of the process of law. For the aforesaid reasons, the following:

¶135

ORDER

¶136

(i) Criminal Petition is allowed.

¶137

(ii) The impugned proceedings in C.C.No.4319/2020pending on the file of VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru is quashed qua the petitioner.

¶138

(iii) It is made clear that the observations made in the course of the order is only for the purpose of consideration of the case of petitioner under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. and the same shall not bind or influence the proceedings against any other accused pending before any other fora ."

¶139

16 -

¶140

NC: 2024:KHC:47952 CRL.P No. 2095 of 2023

¶141

In the light of the aforesaid reasons, the following:

¶142

ORDER

¶143

i) The criminal petition insofar as petitioner Nos.1 and 2 - accused Nos.1 and 2 stands dismissed as withdrawn;

¶144

ii) The criminal petition insofar as petitioner Nos.3 and 4 - accused Nos.3 and 4 is allowed; and

¶145

iii) The proceedings in C.C.No.1406/2022 pending on the file of the I Additional Civil Judge and J.M.F.C. Court, Harihara, qua accused Nos.3 and 4, stand quashed.

¶146

Sd/(M.NAGAPRASANNA)

¶147

JUDGE

¶148

KG List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10

Srikanth v. State of Karnataka by Psi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Srikanth v. State of Karnataka by Psi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Chaluvaraju Vs the State of Karnataka

Sri Prabhakar S Vs State of Karnataka

Malike Saba Vs Sameer Hamsa Ramla

Sri.Harsha Chandrashekharaiah Vs the State by Yelahanka Police

Smt Jayamma Vs State of Karnataka

Sri. Dunna Gopikrishana @ Duna Gopi Vs the State of Karnataka