No prosecution of customer for mere visit to brothel house for prosecution: Andhra Pradesh High Court
The Andhra Pradesh High Court, passed a Judgement on 21st April 2022 were This was seen in the case of Chennuboina Raj Kumar vs. State of Andhra Pradesh CRIMINAL PETITION NO.2900 OF 2022, that the petitioner is only client who went bordello for whoredom on payment made to other accused and as per the settled law in this regard, client is not liable for prosecution for any of the offences for which the F.I.R. is registered. Therefore, allowing the proceedings to be continued against the petitioner in the facts and situations of the case would amount to abuse of process of Court. & the case was presided by The Hon’ble Sri Justice D. Ramesh
FACTS OF THE CASE
Learned counsel for the petitioner prayed for quash of the proceedings against the petitioner. Learned counsel further submits that this is a capped in view of the earlier order passed by this Court in Criminal Petition No.3727 of 2020, this court in case of Sri Roopendra Singh v. State of Karnataka has quashed the proceedings against the accused therein, who went the bordello for whoredom, on the ground that they are mere clients and not liable for prosecution. Therefore, in view of the above stated order of this Court & for the reasons stated therein, this Criminal Petition is allowed. This Criminal Petition under Section 482 of “Cr.P.C.”, is filed seeking quash of the proceedings in on the file of the Special JMFC for Mobile, Guntur.
Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that based on the information received on 19th October 2020, the police registered crime against the petitioner & after conducting investigation, Charge Sheet was filed before Special JMFC for Mobile, Guntur, which is under confinement stage. The allegation is that at the time when the police raided the bordello, they found the petitioner in the said bordello as client who went for whoredom on payment of money to other accused.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is only client who went the said bordello for whoredom on payment made to other accused & as per law in this regard, client is not liable for prosecution for any of the offences for which the F.I.R. is registered. Therefore, he would submit that allowing the proceedings to be continued against the petitioner in the facts & situations of the case would amount to abuse of process of Court. Therefore, prayed for quash of the said proceedings against the petitioner.
Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that this is a covered matter whereby, this court in case of Sri Roopendra Singh v. State of Karnataka, has quashed the proceedings against the accused therein, who went bordello for whoredom, on the ground that they are mere clients & not liable for prosecution.
JUDGEMENT
Therefore, in view of the aforesaid order of this Court & for the reasons stated therein, this Criminal Petition is allowed & the aforesaid on the file of the Special JMFC for Mobile, Guntur, registered against the petitioner, is hereby quashed. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending, in this Criminal Petition, shall stand closed.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”.
JUDGEMENT REVIEWED BY YAKSHU JINDAL.