STATE Vs. MEHRO AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The twenty criminal revisions in which I am now giving judgment have raised the question of the competence of a police officer, other than a special police officer, to investigate offences under the Suppression of Immoral Traffic in Women and Girls Act, 1956 (hereinafter called the Act).

(2.) In all these cases, the investigation which appears to have been conducted by an officer, other than a special police officer as defined under the Act, has been held by the trial Magistrate to be contrary to law and a direction has been made that the offences which are the subject matter of these revisions should be re -investigated by the appropriate authority and a proper charge sheet framed thereafter.

(3.) In pursuance of the International Convention signed at new York on 9th of May, 1950, for the suppression of immoral traffic in women and girls, the Suppression of Immoral Traffic in Women and Girls Act was enacted on 13th of December, 1956. Clause (1) of Sec. 2 defines a "special police officer" to mean "a police officer appointed by or on behalf of the State Government to be in charge of police duties within a specified area for the purpose of this Act". All the accused persons in these cases were charged under Sec. 8 of the Act which makes it an offence for anyone to seduce or solicit any person for the purposes of prostitution and makes it punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to six months or with fine upto Rs. 500/ -. The investigation of these cases apparently was in the hands of a person who was not a special police officer under the Act and it was contended before the trial Magistrate that for this reason the entire proceedings ought to be quashed. This plea found favour with the trial Magistrate against whose order the State has come up in revision.