THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL PETITION No.12175 of 2011 ORDER: Petitioner/A-4 approached this Court with a prayer to quash the proceedings initiated against him in C.C.No.203 of 2011 on the ﬁle of VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Nampally, Hyderabad, wherein he is facing trial for the oﬀences punishable under Sections 3,4,5 and 6 of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 19.01.2011 at 1845 hours, on the credible information that some persons are indulging in prostitution activities, the Inspector of Police, Moghalpura Police Station, along with panch witnesses reached the premises bearing H.No.23-3- 798 and conducted search of the said premises and rescued two sex workers namely Heena Fatima and Bushra Begum and apprehended A1 to A3. The Inspector of Police recorded the confessional-cum-seizure panchanama of A1 to A3 and seized their cell phones and two bikes and also cash from them. They also apprehended A4 and A5, who came to the brothel house as visitors to have sex with the sex workers by paying money to them. Basing on the complaint, a case in Crime 7 of 2011 was registered and after completion of investigation, charge sheet was ﬁled against A1 to A5 for the oﬀences stated above. Heard. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is in no way concerned to the present case and he was not present in the place of oﬀence. He also submitted that the petitioner is falsely implicated in the present complaint, thus, prayed to quash the proceedings against the petitioner. Section 3 of the Immoral Traﬃc (Prevention) Act, 1956, for short (‘the Act’) deals with punishment for keeping a brothel house or allowing premises to be used as a brothel. Section 4 of the Act speaks about the punishment for living on the earnings of prostitution. Section 5 of the Act prescribes the punishment for procuring, inducing or taking a woman or girl for the sake of prostitution. Section 6 of the Act deals with detaining a woman or girl in premises where prostitution is carried on. Now the point for consideration before this Court is ‘Whether the petitioner can be proceeded for the alleged offences mentioned in the charge sheet?’ Mere perusal of the sections above mentioned would clearly establish that a person who involves himself with intent to satisfy his sexual urge cannot be prosecuted under the provisions of the Act. As such, this Court is of the view that the present complaint against the petitioner/A-4 is erroneous and without any legal basis and the petitioner herein cannot be punished under the provisions of the Act. Hence, the present complaint is liable to be quashed against the petitioner/A-4. Accordingly, the criminal petition is allowed and the proceedings against the petitioner/A-4 in C.C.No.203 of 2011 on the ﬁle of VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Nampally, Hyderabad, are hereby quashed. ____________________ JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO 29.11.2011 v v