Allowed

A-3 Kotha Srisailam v. The State of Telangana

Telangana HC6 Feb 2025CRLP/1647/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A customer of an alleged brothel sought quashing of proceedings under Section 370(A)(2) IPC and Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act. The High Court held no material showed knowledge of trafficking and no allegation of running the brothel or living on its earnings; proceedings were quashed as abuse of process.

What did the court decide?

Proceedings against petitioner/Accused No.3 in P.R.C No.30 of 2023 on the file of XIV Addl. Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Hayathnagar were quashed.

A-3 Kotha Srisailam Vs The State of Telangana — Quashing and FIR | Telangana HC (2025)

¶1

¶2

HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD

¶3

13257l

¶4

THURSDAY,THE SIXTH DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY FIVE PRESENT

¶5

THE HONOURABLE SMT JUSTICE JUVVADI SRIDEVI

¶6

Between:

¶7

CRIMINAL PET ITION NO :1647 OF 2025

¶8

A-3 Kotha Srisailam, S/o. Mutyalu, Aged about 33 years, Occ Auto Driver, R/o. H.No. 1-23 Hanumannagar, Choutuppal, yadadri Bhongir District. ...PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.3

¶9

AND

¶10

The State of Telangana, Through S.H.O, pS Hayathnagar Rep by its public Prosecutor, High Court at Hyderabad

¶11

... COMPLAINANT/ RESPONDENT

¶12

Petition under section 528 of BNSS, praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminat petition, the High a;;,1 ;ry be pleased to cail for the records rerating to proceedings in crime ils ot inzi , PRC No.30 of 2023 of pS Hayathnrg"r on ttre fire of xr-v Addr Judiciai lrrrgliit" of First Class at Hayathnagar, Rangareddy Diskict, registered the case ijrin.t the--petitioner 370 A (2) oF lpc and sec-3, 4, s oF prevention of lmmo"ral of trafficking act-'1956 pending against the petitioner/Accused No.3 and quash the same as illegal;

¶13

l.A. NO: 1 OF 2025

¶14

Petition under section 52g of BNSS, praying that in the circumstances stated in the Memorandum of Grounds of criminar'peitition,the nigh court;;y oe ql-"e"d to stay of arr further proceedings in crime 44s ot 2023 i-n pRc tto.sb ot 2023 of PS Hayathnagar on the fire or itv Root Judiciar Magistrate or rirsiCLss ?!lqygllrgqur,^{Rangareddy-District,registeredthe case} igainst the petitioner 370 A (2) oF IPC and Sec 3, 4, 5 oF Frevention of rmmolr or tranicLinj act 1956 pending against the petitioner/Accused No.3;

¶15

This Petition coming on for hearing, upon perusing the Memorandum of Grounds of Criminal ee1ltlon and up6n' hearing the arguments of Sri POTHAMSHETTI MANOJ KUMAR ,Advocate for the petitioner Ind Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, Addl. public prosecutor on behalf of the Respondent;

¶16

The Court made the following ORDER:

¶17

THE HONOURABLE SMT.^{JUSTICEJUWADISRIDEVI}

¶18

CRIMINAL PETITIO N No.1647^{ol 2O25}

¶19

ORDER

¶20

This Criminal Petition is filed^{under Section 528 of the} Bhaiatiya Nyaya Sanhitha, 2023^{(for short 'BNSS') by the} tretitioneraccused No.3 to^quash the^{proceedingsagainst him in P.R Cl.No 30 of} 2023 pending on the file of the^{learnedXIV Additional Judicial} t\ilagistrate of First Class at Hayathnagar,^{Ranga Reddy Dislrict- The} offences alleged against the^{petitioner are under Seclion 371(AX2) of} the lndian Penal Code^(for short^{'lPC') and Sections 3, 4 an'j 5 of the} lmmoral Traffic^(Prevention) Act,^'l 956^{(for short 'the Act').}

¶21

Heard Sri Pothamshetti l/anoj^{Kumar,learned ccunselfor} petitioner and Sri Jithender Rao Veeramalla, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State-respondeni No.1 and^{perused the recrlrd.}

¶22

ln brief the case of the^prosecution is that the^Police, Hayathnagar Police Station received credible information^{about running} of brothel house and raided the^premises at H.No.4-7-17711 ,^{F'lot No.01,} backside of Captain Cook Restaurant, Anand Nagar,^{Hayathnagar,and} found that accused No.1 was organizing brothel house and cetitioneraccused No.3 is the customer of the said brothel house.

¶23

Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the woman who was found with the^{petitioner-accused} No.3 is not a trafficked woman

¶24

¶25

and petitioner is nothing to do with the alleged offences. The ingredients of the offence under Section 370(AX2) of rpc and Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Act does not attract to the present case on hand. Thereby, he prayed to quash the criminal proceedings against the petitioner

¶26

Learned Additionar pubric prosecutor for the state submitted that there are specific ailegations against the petitioner and the truth or otherwise would come out only after conducting full_fledged trial by the concerned Court below and prayed to dismiss this Criminal petition.

¶27

In view of the above facts and circumstances of the case, it is relevant to extract the provision under Section 370 of lpC:

¶28

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

¶29

Firstl using threats, or

¶30

Second/ using force, or any other form of coercion,

¶31

¶32

Thirdl by abduction, or Fourthl by practising fraud, or deception, or Fifthlv- by abuse of power, or

¶33

Sixthl by inducement, including the giving or receiving of payments or benefits, in order to achieve the consent of any person having control over the

¶34

¶35

¶36

person recruited, transported,^{harboured,transferred or} receivecl, commits the^{offence of trafficking.}

¶37

Explanation 1- The^{expression"exPloitation"sltall} include any act of^{physical exploitationor any form of} sexual exploitation,^{slavery or practicessimilarto} slavery, servitude, or the^{forced removal of organs.} Explanation 2- The consent^{of the victim is immate'ial} in determination of the offence^{of trafficking.}

¶38

@)Whoever^{commits the offence of traffickingshall be} punished 'ruith rigorous imprisonment^{for a term which} shall not be less than seven^{years, but whichn.tay} extend to ten^years, and shall^{also be liable to fine.}

¶39

(!)Where the offence involves the trafficking^{of m lre} than one^person, it shall be^{punishablewith rigorr.rus} imprisonment for a term which^{shall not be less than:en} years but which may extend to imprisonment^{for life,} and shall also be liable^{to fine.}

¶40

@Where^{the offence involves the trafficking of a miror,} 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.

¶41

(flWhere the offence involves the trafficking of^m,)re than one minor, it shall be^{punishablewith 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.

¶42

(Qllf a person is convicted of the offence of trafficking of minor on more than one occasion, then such^pers;on shall be pr.rnished with imprisonment for life, which s\all

¶43

¶44

mean imprisonment for the remainder of that person,s naturat tife, and shall also be liable to fine.

¶45

(!)When a public servant or a police officer is involved in the trafficking of any person then, such public seryant 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."

¶46

Section 370(4) of lpC reads as under:

¶47

Exploitation of a trafficked person:

¶48

(llWhoever, knowingly or having reason to believe that a minor has been trafficked, engages such minor for sexual exploitation in any manner, shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than five years, but which may extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.

¶49

(!)\Nhoever, knowingly by or having reason to believe that a person has been trafficked, engages such person for sexual exploitation in any manner, shall be punished with rigorous imprisonment for a term which shall not be Iess than three years, but which may extend to five years, and shall also be liable to fine.

¶50

As per Sections 370 and 370(4) of lpC, any person by using

¶51

threat or Jorce or any form of coercion or abduction by practicing fraud or deception or by abusing of power or by inducing.can only be termed as a 'trafficked person'. ln the present case, even according to the prosecution, LW9-victim stated that she was doing prostitution for the sake of money.

¶52

¶53

¶54

OB Now coming to^{Sections3, 4 and 5 of the Act. the provisionstn}

¶55

detail are extracteo^below:

¶56

3 Punishment for^{keepinqa brothel or allowi}

¶57

oremises to^{be usedasa brothel.}

¶58

(l,lAny person who keeps or^{manages,or acts or} assists in the keeping^{or management of, a brothelshall} be punishable on first^{conviction with rigorous} imprisonment for^{a term of not less than one year atrd} 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 ard} not more than five^{years and also with fine which may} extend b two thousand^ruPees.

¶59

(!-)Any person who-

¶60

@,,lbeing^{the tenant, lessee, occupier or personin} charge of any^{premises, uses, or knowingly allows any} other person to sue, such^{premisesor any part therr,rof} as a brothel, or

¶61

(!,,lbeing 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 punishableon} first conviction with imprisonment^{for a term whichn ay} extend to two years and with^{fine which may extend to} two thousand rupees and^{in the event} of a^secondor

¶62

¶63

¶64

subsequent conviction, with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to five years and also with fine. BlNotwithstanding 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.

¶65

Punishment for livinq on the earninqs of prostitution.

¶66

(/lAny person over the age of eighteen years who knowingly lives, wholly or in part, on the earnings of the prostitution of a woman or girl 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.

¶67

(!)Vtlhere any person is proved-

¶68

/a,lto^{be living with, or} to be habitually in the company of, a prostitute; or

¶69

t/b,lto 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

¶70

/clto^{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 / /

¶71

J...

¶72

¶73

meaning of sub-section^{(1):Providedthat no such} presumption shall be drawn in the^{case of a son or} daughter of a^{prostitute,if the son or daughter is bel'rw} the age of eighteen Years.

¶74

Procurino, inducin^q or^{takinctwoman or qirl tor} the sake of^{prostitution.}

¶75

(llAny person who-

¶76

(g,lprocures or attempts to^procure a^{womanor girl.} whether with or without her consent,^{for the purpose of} prostitution, or

¶77

(O,,linduces a woman or^girl to^go from^{any place, with} the intent that she may for the^{purpose of prostitution} become the inmate of, or frequent,^{a brothel; or}

¶78

(c)takes or attempts to take a woman or girl, or causes a woman or^girl to be taken,^{from one placeto anotlrer} with a view to her carrying on, or being^{brought up to} carry on prostitution; or

¶79

/d]causes or^{inducesa woman or girl to carryon} prostitutior; shall be punishable on first convictton^tt'ith rigorous imprisonment for a term of not^{lessthan cne} year and not more than two years and also with f ne which may extend to two thousand rupees.

¶80

@)ln^{the eventof a second or subsequent conviction of} an offence under this section a^person shall^be punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term of rtot less than two years and not more than five^years and also with fine which may extend to two thousand ru pees.

¶81

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

¶82

¶83

¶84

14lin^{the place} from which a woman or girl is procured, induced to go, taken or caused to be taken or from which an attempt to procure or take such woman or girl is made; or

¶85

(&,[in the place to which she may have gone as a result of the inducement or to which she is taken or caused to be taken or an attempt to take her is made.

¶86

The Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Act deals with regard to punishment for keeping a brother or ailowing premises to be used as a brothel, punishment for riving on the earnings of prostitution; punishment for procuring, inducing or taking woman or girl for the sake of prostitution. There is no allegation against the petitioner that he is running brothel, or he is living on the earnings of prostitution, or he procured girl for doing prostitution. ln the present case on hand, as per the case of prosecution, the sore alregation against petitioner-accused No.3 is that he is the customer. Therefore, the allegation against the petitioner does not constitute the offences under Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Act.

¶87

As seen from the entire case record, the victim joined brothel house and given her willingness to do sex with the customers. Furthermore, at the stage of filing of the FIR or during the course of investigation or through the averments of the charge sheet, the porice could not putforth any material to substantiate that the petitioner had / /

¶88

¶89

knowledge and/or the reason to believe that^{the woman was trafficked} for the^purpose of^{prostitution.} Therefore, the^{ingredients requiredfor} constituting the^,cffence under Section 370(AX2) of^{IPC are not made} out against the^petitioner.

¶90

ln view of the above discussion and having considere,d the fact that the petitioner- accused No.3 had no knowledge that the woman was trafficked for the purpose of prostitution, this Court is of the ccnsidered view that the continuation of the proceedings against the petitioneraccused No.3 amounts to abuse of process of law, there:for,e, the proceedings against the petitioner-accused No.3 is liable to be quashed

¶91

Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is allowed and the proceedings against the petitioner-accused No.3 in P.R.C No.30 of 2023 pending on the file of the learned XIV Additiona Judicial Magistrate of First Class at Hayathnagar, Ranga Reddy Dirstrict, are hereby quashed

¶92

As a sequel, pending miscellaneous applications, if ilny, shall stand closed. Sd/.^M OHD.^ISMAIL REGISTRAR ASSISTANT ,/TRUE^COPY/' '^{\v sEcrtoNoFFlcER}

¶93

To,

¶94

Hayath^tagar r The XXIV^{Addr l"Ietropolitantvlagistrate'!V!er3OLO-at} i i'i"'dii;".^{;",,'" on'"$j1iffi} S,'-,itr$:133q^q911,,91 rtigt, court^{at ir.ijeraua] tourl} l. *:33J:"Hj,iPJ5$'StbLiioR' 5. Two^{CD CoPies}

I I

HIGH COURT

DATED:0610212025

.'f r ! .--
.
k
Jc (
I
11 lpB Ztr6 I
,* J
/ r rr^ lri

¶100

ORDER

¶101

CRLP.No.1647^{of 2025}

¶102

ALLOWING^{THE CRIMINAL PETITION}

¶103

$ b

A-3 Kotha Srisailam v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A-3 Kotha Srisailam v. The State of Telangana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ammala Bala Raju Vs The State of Telangana

Thangadpalli Vijay Kumar Vs State of Telangana

Dulam Sadanandam Vs The State of Telangana

Jasthi Rajesh Kumar, Vs State of Telengana

Uppu Mohan Krishna Vs Uppu Lavanya

Harjot Singh, Vs State of Telangana