SHEELA CHARLES Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Final report has been filed in Crime No.1172/2009 of Panangad Police Station for the offences under S.3, S.4, S.5 and S.7 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956. Petitioner is the 3rd accused. The offence was allegedly detected by CW9 Circle Inspector of Police, Thripunithura (Hill Palace) while he was on additional charge of the Circle Inspector of Police, Ernakulam South Police Station.

(2.) According to the petitioner, CW9 was not empowered to act as a special police officer within the meaning of S.13(2) of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act.

(3.) Learned Public Prosecutor has produced the copy of notification No.145/16 dated 04/05/2016, whereby the earlier notification was amended through the notification dated 04/05/2016. The words in the earlier notification "The Circle Inspectors of Police attached to the following police stations in the State" are substituted with the words "All officers of and above the rank of Inspector of Police in the local Police Station in the Crime Branch, Crime Investigation Department". At the same time, it does not say that the words "within their respective area of jurisdiction" have been substituted or taken away. Unless and until the aforesaid words are substituted or taken away, it won't serve any purpose at all to enable an Inspector of Police working elsewhere to detect and report a crime of this nature being committed in a different area other than his respective area of jurisdiction.