Showing posts with label Prevention of Immoral Traffic Act. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Prevention of Immoral Traffic Act. Show all posts

Sunday, 31 May 2026

The Prajwala Verdict: How the Supreme Court Brought a Paradigm Shift to India’s Anti-Trafficking Jurisprudence

 


Manual of Vigilance: 6 Critical Shifts in India’s Judicial Response to Human Trafficking

The scale of human trafficking in India is a staggering humanitarian crisis. As far back as 2004, the Union of India acknowledged the existence of at least 30 lakh victims. For decades, our legal approach was stunted by the Suppression of Immoral Traffic in Women and Girls Act (SITA), a framework that prioritized "suppression" over the holistic dignity of the survivor. The Justice Verma Committee legacy finally signaled a hard-won victory for survivors, pivoting the law from mere suppression toward "prevention and protection."

Print Page

Wednesday, 5 November 2025

Supreme Court: Even if investigation is not conducted by authorized officer, the trial is not vitiated unless a prejudice is shown

As the foregoing discussion shows the investigation in the present case by the Deputy Superintendent of Police cannot be considered to be in any way unauthorised or contrary to law. In this connection it may not be out of place also to point out that the function of investigation is merely to collect evidence and any irregularity or even illegality in the course of collection of evidence can scarcely be considered by itself to affect the legality of the trial by an otherwise competent court of the offence so investigated. {Para 15}

Ratio: It is well settled law that even if investigation is not conducted by authorized officer, the trial is not initiated unless a prejudice is shown.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal No. 1439 of 2017

Decided On: 18.08.2017

R.A.H. Siguran Vs. Shankare Gowda and Ors. 

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Adarsh Kumar Goel and U.U. Lalit, JJ.

 Citation: 2017 INSC 777, MANU/SC/1086/2017.

Print Page

Thursday, 2 June 2016

Whether same facts can constitute offence under IPC and Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act?

The contention that the provisions of IPC are ancillary to the
provisions of ITP Act ignores the settled principle that same set of facts may
constitute offences both under the IPC and a special enactment. The
Supreme Court in the decision reported as (1988) 4 SCC 655 State of Bihar 
Vs. Murad Ali Khan & others held –
“31. The same set of facts, in conceivable cases, can constitute
offences under two different laws. An act or an omission can
amount to and constitute an offence under the IPC and at the
same time constitute an offence under any other law. 
 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

 Judgment Delivered on: June 01, 2016
CRL.A. 723/2014
REKHA .

v
STATE .

CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA

Print Page

Monday, 30 November 2015

Whether police inspector can conduct investigation in offences under Prevention of Immoral Traffic Act, 1956?

Admittedly, the Investigating Officer (PW-10) is an Inspector of Police
attached to West Bengal Police and in view of the aforesaid Notification it cannot,
therefore, be disputed that he is a special Police Officer empowered to investigate
offences under the aforesaid law.
The very substratum on which the opposite parties have been acquitted is
therefore contrary to law and is liable to be set aside. The impugned order of
acquittal is accordingly set aside.
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
CRIMINAL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION
Present :
The Hon’ble Justice Joymalya Bagchi
C.R.R. No. 3274 of 2010
Ashok Hazra
-VersusThe
State of West Bengal & Ors.


Judgment on: November 10, 2014.
Joymalya Bagchi, J.:
Citation;2015 CRLJ(NOC)489 Cal

Print Page