CASE TITLE:
Sarika @ Radha @ Lovanya T Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Ors
DATE OF JUDGEMENT:
August 2, 2022
BENCH:
Justice. Asha Menon
PARTIES:
Petitioner – Sarika @ Radha @ Lovanya T
Respondent – State of NCT of Delhi & Ors
SUBJECT
- The application had been filed by the accused under section 439 of Code of Criminal Procedure for the grant of interim bail against the F.I.R filed. The court discussed that the rights guaranteed to all the citizens shall be applicable to a sex worker too and they cannot be given any special treatment.
ISSUES RAISED
- Whether the sex workers are subjected to any special treatment?
- Whether the applicant is liable under the Immoral Traffick (Prevention)Act, 1956?
IMPORTANT PROVISIONS:
SECTION 370 OF INDIAN PENAL CODE: This section deals with trafficking of a person. This section provides that any person whoever transports or transfers any person or persons either by threat, using force, abuse of power commits the offence of trafficking.
SECTION 372 OF INDIAN PENAL CODE: This section deals with selling of minors for the purposes of prostitution etc. the section provides that any person who lets to hire or disposes any person under the age of eighteen in employment for the purposes of prostitution is liable for a punishment with imprisonment for a period of ten years along with the fine.
ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE PETITIONER
- The counsel on behalf of the applicant submitted that applicant be granted an interim bail as the mother of same had to be operated and had relied upon the case [Ashique Ilahi vs. The State (NCT of Delhi) 2015 SCC OnLine Del 11082] and held that the circumstances in the case were similar and an interim bail was granted.
- The counsel on behalf of the applicant relied upon the case [Budhadev Karmaskar vs. State of W.B.,2022 SCC OnLine SC 704] and argued that though the applicant was a sex worker she has to be entitled for the protection under the law.
- The counsel further argued that there were no allegations made upon the applicant as to trafficking of minors. Further it was submitted that the only one among the minors had held that they have been trafficked and the rest held that they were by their own free will.
- ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE RESPONDENT
- The counsel on behalf of the respondent argued that the applicant seeking for bail would lead to great chance of her absconding and also influencing the prosecutrix. The counsel further submitted that the trial was yet to take place and the grant of bail would affect the trial and also examination of the prosecutrix.
- The counsel further argued that the there was no life-threatening condition with regard to the knee replacement surgery and also argued that the mother already has a person looking after her.
- The counsel quoted the status report and held that the prosecutrix identified the applicant and also held that she forced into it.
- The counsel further submitted that the existence of a person already to take care of her mother makes it not so necessary to grant the bail as there were chances of the applicant absconding.
JUDGEMENT ANALYSIS
- The court observed the contentions of both the parties and held that the submissions made by the counsel of applicant as to grant a week’s interim bail for her mother to be operated were meaningless.
- The court considered the nature of the allegations against the applicant and also the fact that the prosecutrix had not been examined the court dismissed the application of the applicant and held there were no grounds to grant an interim bail both on the submissions made and the reports found.
CONCLUSION
- Thus, though the sex workers are treated equally to every other citizen and also provided with equal rights cannot claim for any special treatment if she violates any law. The court also further held that the chances of absconding were higher thus the grant of interim bail was cancelled or dismissed.
Learn the practical aspects of CrPC HERE, CPC HERE, IPC HERE, Evidence Act HERE, Family Laws HERE, DV Act HERE
Click here to download the original copy of the judgement
