STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. IRIS CHANDRABALA PREMNATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revisional application has been referred to a division bench by Mr. Justice Gajendragadkar in consequence, we are informed, of Mr. Justice Shah's decision which has been reported in --'Naran Velji v. Ranjitsingh', The question raised is one under Section 362(4), Criminal P. C. It is one of frequent occurrence and, therefore, is of some importance.

(2.) The facts of the case in which the question arises are simple. The applicant was "prosecuted before the Additional Chief Presidency Magistrate, 3rd Court, Bombay, for an offence of soliciting persons in a street for the purpose of prostitution under Section 3(b), Bombay Prevention of Prostitution Act, 1923. Section 3, so far as material, provides :

(3.) The learned Magistrate considered that the case for the prosecution was proved by the evidence of two police witnesses supported as it was by the evidence of Rambhau. He disbelieved the defence case which was that on the day in question at about 2-30 p.m. the accused was going to buy her rations and while she was passing between the Leopold Hotel and Imperial Stores, two men suddenly came from the opposite direction, lifted her and put her into a taxi. The learned Magistrate considered that the story of the accused was a cock and bull story, similarly, he disbelieved the defence evidence and pointed out that, at any rate, the evidence of Sorab Hormusji Kanga would go to support the prosecution case. In the result, he convicted the applicant of the offence charged against her and sentenced her to suffer simple imprisonment for one day and to pay ft fine of Rs. 100 or in default to suffer simple imprisonment for one month. From the order of conviction and sentence the accused has come up in revision.