PARVATI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MUNSHILAL and Parvati, Petitioners in this revision, were tried by the Magistrate, First Class, Ambah, under Sections 372 and 373 respectively of the Indian Penal Code. The charge was that Munshilal sold a girl named Nargis alias Asha to Parvati for the purpose of prostitution. Munshilal and Parvati were both convicted for the offences of which they were charged and each of them was sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a line of Rs.100. The conviction and sentence of each of them have been maintained by the Additional Sessions Judge, Morena. This revision was filed by both the accused, but Shri Gupta, Learned Counsel for the Petitioners, informs me that Munshilal has since died, and, therefore, he presses this petition only in respect of Parvati.

(2.) IT is common ground that Parvati was a prostitute at one time. It is also an undisputed fact that Parvati obtained possession of Nargis, a girl of about six years from Munshilal. The defence was that Parvati had long before the transaction abandoned her vocation of a prostitute and that the girl was not bought or sold, but was given in adoption by Munshilal to Parvati.

(3.) TO my mind all discussion in the Courts below whether the adoption was valid in law or not was unnecessary. The express words used in Section 373 are "whoever buys, hires or otherwise obtains possession". Even a valid adoption would be covered by the expression 'otherwise obtains possession'. Therefore, it is of no consequence whether Parvati could or could not adopt Nargis and whether the alleged adoption was valid and effective. Two points have been canvassed before me: