The Bombay High Court has upheld the conviction of a woman found guilty under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956, in a case involving the rescue of two minor girls from a Mumbai premises allegedly being used for prostitution. The Court ruled that minor inconsistencies in witness testimony or procedural objections could not outweigh the overall evidence establishing the prosecution's case.
Background of the Case
The case arose from a police raid conducted in August 1996 after officers received information that prostitution was being carried out from a building in Mumbai. During the operation, two minor girls were found inside a room along with the accused. Following investigation, she was prosecuted under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act.
A Metropolitan Magistrate convicted her under Section 6 of the Act and sentenced her to two years' rigorous imprisonment along with a fine. The conviction was later affirmed by the Sessions Court, prompting the present revision before the Bombay High Court.
Before the High Court, the defence argued that there were contradictions in the prosecution's evidence, delay in registration of the FIR, absence of an ossification test, and non-examination of the rescued girls before the trial court. It also questioned whether the statutory procedure under the Act had been properly followed.
Take CourtBook Everywhere
Access your account on the go with our mobile app.
Court's Observations
Justice M.M. Sathaye rejected the objections raised by the defence after examining the record in detail.
The Court observed that offences involving human trafficking are crimes against both society and humanity, particularly when minors are involved. It noted that rescued victims often suffer severe trauma and may not always be available or willing to testify during trial.
"The Court observed that minor contradictions in the testimony of police officers or panch witnesses cannot be treated as fatal in cases involving trafficking of children."
The Bench found that the raid, the recovery of the two minor girls, and the presence of the accused at the premises were consistently established through the testimony of the independent panch witness, police officers and the contemporaneous panchnama.
Addressing the challenge to the medical evidence, the Court held that the age determination was based on X-rays and clinical examination conducted by the medical officer. It clarified that an ossification test essentially relies upon radiological examination and expert medical opinion, making the defence argument factually unsustainable.
The Court also held that even after giving the benefit of a possible age variation, both rescued girls remained minors. Since they were found in a brothel with the accused, the statutory presumption under Section 6(2) of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act applied. As no defence evidence was produced to rebut that presumption, the prosecution's case stood proved.
Decision
Finding no procedural illegality or miscarriage of justice in the concurrent findings of the lower courts, the Bombay High Court dismissed the criminal revision application.
It upheld the conviction and sentence imposed under Section 6 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, cancelled the applicant's bail bonds, and directed the trial court to take appropriate steps to secure her presence in accordance with law.
Case Details
Case Title: Smt. Rita Dilip Ghosh v. State of Maharashtra
Case Number: Criminal Revision Application No. 227 of 2003
Judge: Justice M.M. Sathaye
Decision Date: July 3, 2026
