MALLIKA RAJU Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by Accused nos. 2 and 3 takes exception to the Judgment and order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, in the Court of Sessions, Greater Mumbai dated january 30, 2004 in Sessions Case No. 865 of 2002. The appellants/accused Nos. 2 and 3 alongwith one more accused were tried for offence punishable under sections 373, 366-A, 368 and 323 of I. P. Code as well as under sections 3 and 4 of Immoral Traffic Prevention Act (PITA).

(2.) The prosecution case, as per the fir registered on 11th April, 2001, is that, on information received by PSI Shinde (P. W. 10) , the duty officer PI-Prasan Yogiraj More (P. W. 4) attached to Bhandup Police Station alongwith lady constable went to Sonapur, Bhandup for rescuing some girls allegedly engaged in carrying on prostitution in that area. It is stated that one Rekha Greateful attached to N. G. O alongwith Mr. Khairnar, retired Deputy commissioner of B. M. C. went to room No. l, yamunabai Chawl at Sonapur. One Kamakshi rajan Kounder told the raiding party that she be rescued from the profession of prostitution. Kamakshi, it is alleged, also told the raiding party that one girl Vijaya @ Menaka (P. W. I) Raja kaunder, a minor was inside the room and also desired to be rescued. Vijaya (P. W. I) then pointed out to one Mallika an eunuch as the person who had confined the girls in her brothel. The said Mallika is accused No. 2. Vijaya (P. W. I) also told that another eunuch was involved in this business. It is prosecution's case that the raiding party received information that near the said brothel there was another brothel where some more girls were trapped and confined for the purpose of prostitution. Accordingly, the raiding party went to that place and two minor girls were found on the spot, namely, Seema @ Sarita Kanhaiya Devnath bangali (P. W. 2) and Manju @ Onima Mihir kawda (P. W. 3) , who were in the custody of sunita Kanchan Thapa-accused No. 3. On the basis of the statement of Kamakshi Rajan kounder recorded by PSI Vijay Shinde (P. W. 10) , FIR came to be registered being c. R. No. 82 of 2001. The FIR records that the complainant Kamakshi Rajan Kounder while she was 15 years of age was purchased by Mumtaz zakir Hussain-accused No. 1. It is alleged in the said FIR that one Kumar and his wife from Tamil nadu had brought Kamakshi Kounder by inducing her that she will be given job and brought her to Sonapur, Bhandup, Mumbai and sold her to the Accused No. 1 Mumtaz, who in turn forced her to have intercourse with several unknown persons for the purpose of prostitution. This is the only case spelt out in the FIR. On the basis of this FIR, investigation commenced and eventually charge-sheet came to be filed against the three accused. As the accused pleaded not guilty to the charge, the trial proceeded. The trial Court framed following charges against the accused.

(3.) Sunita Kanchan Thapa. as under.