RASIKLAL MANILAL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AT the outset the point of law raised by the learned advocate for the appellant may be considered. The appellant was charged, as earlier stated, with offences under Section 366, I. P. C. and Section 5 of the Suppression of Immoral Traffic in Women and Girls Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ). The contention is that the investigation in respect of the latter offence is not in compliance with the provisions of the Act. The Act provides for the suppression of immoral traffic in women and girls and was enacted in pursuance of the International Convention signed at New York on the 9th day of May 1950. The Act creates new offences in respect of traffic in women and girls and creates a special machinery in respect, of the inquiry into and trial of these offences. Section 13 of the Act which is relevant in connection with the argument advanced by the advocate of the appellant reads as under: 13. Special police officer and advisory body :

(2.) THE contentions urged by Mr. Soni on behalf of the appellant are two. His first contention is that there is no officer validly appointed under the Act for the area where this offence took place and his second contention is that at any rate the investigation in this case by the Special Police Officer so appointed has not been done in compliance with the provisions of the Act. I propose to examine these contentions in that order,

(3.) ACCORDING to the prosecution Shri Desai, who has been examined as prosecution witness No. 17 and who is the S. D P, O. , Western Railway, is the special police officer appointed by the State Government in this area for the purposes of the Act. Shri Desai has deposed that he has been so appointed and that appointment is by virtue of his office as S. D. P. O. , Western Rail-way. In that connection he has referred to the relevant Notification of the State Government dated 21st August 1968 as amended on 17th of December 1958 under which the S. D. P. Os. Western Railway were appointed Special Officers under the Act in respect of the areas for which they were to function. Shri Desai is an S. D. P O. in charge of the Ahmedabad Sub-Division of the Western Railway which covers the area from Sabarmati to Bulsar. The officers of the rank of S. D. P. Os. are holding the rank either of As. Bistant or Deputy Superintendent of Police. These facts are not disputed. Therefore, if Shri Desai's appointment as a Special Officer by virtue of his office is in accordance with law, it is conceded by Mr. Soni that he was a Special Officer appointed for the area in question for the purposes of the Act. The argument of Mr. Soni is that the Act requires the appointment of a Special Officer not by designation or by office but by name and therefore the notification under which Shri Desai of the Ahmedabad Sub-Division is appointed as the Special Officer under the Act is not in accordance with law. His submission is that the Act creates new offences, provides for a machinery to deal with offences so created, gives special powers to the investigating officers in respect of search and in respect of the removal of the girl concerned and the Act provides for special procedure in respect of certain matters such as the need for presence of a woman panch at the time of the search. The Act therefore contemplates not only that the officers should be of a certain rank or status but also they should have such background as enables them to discharge their functions under the Act effectively. That is why, so he argues, there is also a provision in Section 13 of the Act for associating with the special officers a non-official advisory body. These provisions, according to him, are sufficient to show that there should be a sort of selection for the post of special officers and this element of selection indicates that the special officers should be appointed by name.