Madras High Court: In a petition filed by an Advocate for directing the Police not to disturb the trust and its functions to promote adult recreation and other related activities, B. Pugalendhi, J. while stating that no doubt adults can have sex, but soliciting people and luring them into sexual activities are illegal, had imposed a cost of Rs.10,000/- on him to be paid to the District Social Welfare Officer, Kanyakumari District within period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Background:
The petitioner is the founder of the trust namely ‘Friends for Ever Trust’. The main object of the trust is to promote adult recreation and other related activities. They are providing oil bath and sex related services to its members and its customers. The Inspector searched in the petitioner’s trust premises, and arrested the petitioner and registered the case for the offence under Sections 3(2)(a), 4(2)(a), 5(1)(a) and Sections 7(1)(a) of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956, Sections 366(A) and 342 of the Penal code, 1860, and Sections 5(1), 11(6), 12, 13(b), 14(1), 6, 7, 8 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, 2012.
The petitioner was arrested and remanded into judicial custody on 17-02-2024 and was released on bail on 24-04-2024.
The petitioner claimed that he is a practising advocate in the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court. He went to Nagercoil for the weekend on 16-02-2024. His ex-wife and her parents with the help of advocate and police have arranged for a 17 year old girl to visit the trust on 17-02-2024, and within 20 minutes of her visit, the police entered into the trust, beaten the petitioner and others, seized their mobile phones, took photographs, also projected them as sex workers, abused and also registered a case. This criminal case according to him is a foisted one by sending a girl into the trust at the instance of his ex-wife. Therefore, this criminal case is liable to be quashed.
Analysis and Decision:
The Court took note of the list of services offered in the trust and was shocked that an advocate in robes claimed that he is running a brothel centre and filed this writ petition seeking some protection for running this brothel centre. Therefore, the Court had directed the petitioner to produce his enrollment certificate and law degree certificates to ascertain whether he is an advocate, studied law degree, enrolled in any Bar Association. However, the petitioner did not produce his degree certificates.
The Court noted that the police searched the petitioner’s premises and found three women indulging in sexual activities in the petitioner’s trust. One of the girls was a minor. The police recovered pamphlets, visiting cards, used and unused condoms.
The Court remarked that the purpose of law in society is to preserve the moral sanctity that regulates a society. Therefore, the legal profession is regarded as a noble profession as it is the upholder and protector of law. The petitioner claiming to be an Advocate started a trust with a sole object to provide sex and sex related services to its members and its customers and also proudly claims that he is providing oil bath and sex related services to its members and customers.
Further, the Court noted that the petitioner filed the present petition, based on Budhadev Karmaskar v. State of W.B., (2011) 11 SCC 538, wherein it was held that consensual sex is permitted.
The Court said that the petitioner has not understood the context in which the above judgment has been rendered. The Supreme Court has taken the issue for the purpose of prevention of trafficking and rehabilitation of sex workers, who wish to leave sex work and the conditions conducive for sex workers, who wish to continue sex working as sex workers with dignity.
The Court said that in this case a poor minor girl has been exploited by the petitioner taking advantage of her position by offering Rs.500/- for doing oil massage. The child has been exploited by taking advantage of her poverty.
The Court remarked that “the petitioner appears to be doing this business with the shield of an identity card, which is said to have been issued by the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu and Pudhucherry.”
The Court said that the Tamil Nadu Government to prevent the exploitation of women and trafficking of women, has enacted an Act, viz., the Immoral Trafficking (Prevention) Act, 1956. This Act has been enacted with an aim to prevent the commercialisation of vices and the trafficking of females. This Act does not declare sex work as illegal. However, it prohibits running of brothel centres.
The Court further said that no doubt adults can have sex, but soliciting people and luring them into sexual activities are illegal.
The Court remarked that it is very unfortunate in this case that the person who is doing all these businesses claims to be an Advocate. It is high time the Bar Council has to realise that the reputation of the Advocates in the society is getting decreased.
Thus, the Court directed the Bar Council to ensure that members are enrolled only from reputed institutions and restrict the enrollment from unreputed institutions from Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka and other States.
The Court directed the Bar Council to ascertain the genuineness of the petitioner’s enrollment and educational certificates and proceed further based on the genuineness, in accordance with law . The Police was also directed to find out the genuineness of the petitioner’s educational certificates and to report the same to the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu.
The Court refused to grant any such mandamus as sought for by the petitioner and imposed a cost of Rs.10,000/- on the petitioner to be paid to the District Social Welfare Officer, Kanyakumari District within period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
[Raja Murrugan v. Superintendent of Police, 2024 SCC OnLine Mad 3385, decided on 05-07-2024]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For Petitioner: K.H. Raja Murrugan, Party-in-person
For Respondents: E. Antony Sahaya Prabahar , Addl. Public Prosecutor
Buy Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 HERE
Buy Penal Code, 1860 HERE
