ABDUL RASHEED Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the first and sixth accused in CC No. 281 of 2006 on the file of the court of the Judicial First Class Magistrate IV, Kozhikode. The deletion against the first petitioner is that of commission of offence under Section 3 (1) of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 (for short 'the Act') and that against the 2nd petitioner is one of commission of offences under Sections 4(1) and 5(1) (d) of the Act. On 21/06/2006 the Circle Inspector of Police, Kozhikode Town made a raid on house No. 1/2890, 'Parag', taken on rent by the first petitioner, whereon 'Ashwaradha Ayurveda Hospital and Panchakarma Centre' are housed and found it as a home for harlotry. The accusation is that respondents 2 and 3 are conducting prostitution there. All the accused except the first petitioner/first accused were arrested from there. Consequently, crime No. 215/2006 of Nadakkavu Police Station was registered by the Sub Inspector of Police, Nadakkavu. After completing investigation, Annexure A charge-sheet was laid before the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court IV, Palakkad by the Circle Inspector of Police, Nadakkavu.

(2.) The petitioners seek for quashment of Annexure A charge-sheet in Crime No. 215/2006 of Nadakkavu Police Station on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court IV, Kozhikode, taken on its file as CC No. 281/2006 on manifold grounds. The learned counsel for the petitioners relied on the decision of this Court reported in Sinu Sainudheen v. Sub Inspector of Police, 2002 (1) KLT 693 and also Radhakrishnan v. State of Kerala reported in 2008 (2) KLT 521 , to contend that the prosecution against the petitioners is liable to be terminated. The specific contention of the petitioners is that the raid which resulted in the registration of Crime No. 215/2006 of Nadakkavu Police Station was conducted by the Circle Inspector of Police, Kozhikode Town and he was not the 'Special Police Officer' in terms of the provisions under Section 13(1) of the Act in respect of the area, Nadakkavu. It is contented that the case was registered by the Sub Inspector of Police, Nadakkavu and the investigation was conducted and the charge was laid by the Circle Inspector of Police, Nadakkavu. The above decisions were relied on to contend that inasmuch as the raid was not conducted by the Special Police Officer appointed for the area concerned viz., Nadakkavu, under Section 13 (1) of the Act, no successful prosecution could be conducted in this case based on the raid conducted by the C.I. of Police, Kozhikode.

(3.) Section 13 (1) of the Act reads thus: