Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Ajay Manmathappa Shete, runs a hotel/lodge named Pratham Lodge in Osmanabad. On 17.2.2011, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Osmanabad, issued a show cause notice alleging that in July 2010, the premises were used for allowing prostitutes to use rooms, and that the premises were within 200 meters of public places. The petitioner was asked to show cause why action under Section 18(1) of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 should not be taken. The petitioner submitted a reply on 1.3.2011. Thereafter, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate passed an order on 18.7.2011 directing closure of the hotel, which was challenged in this writ petition. The petitioner argued that only a solitary incident was reported, and no case was registered against the manager Arvind Laxman Hiware, who had admitted to allowing one Gunwant Papa Deshmukh to bring different women. The court held that Section 18(1) requires that the premises be used 'as a place of resort for the purposes of prostitution', which implies repeated or habitual use, not a single isolated incident. The court also noted that the notice did not specify how the premises were within 200 meters of a public place, and no evidence was produced to that effect. The court found that the closure order was not sustainable and quashed it, allowing the writ petition.
Headnote
A) Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 - Section 18(1) - Closure of Premises - Requirement of Repeated Use - The provision requires that the premises must be used 'as a place of resort for the purposes of prostitution' which implies repeated or habitual use, not a single isolated incident. A solitary case of allowing prostitution does not attract Section 18(1) for closure of the hotel. (Paras 7-8)
B) Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 - Section 18(1) - Proximity to Public Place - Burden of Proof - The authority must establish that the premises are within 200 meters of a public place as defined under the Act. In the absence of such evidence, the closure order cannot be sustained. (Para 7)
C) Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 - Section 18(1) - Show Cause Notice - Sufficiency of Grounds - The notice must clearly specify the grounds for proposed action. A notice that merely refers to incidents without detailing how the premises are used as a resort for prostitution is insufficient. (Para 7)
Issue of Consideration
Whether a solitary incident of allowing prostitution in a lodge is sufficient to invoke Section 18(1) of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 for closure of premises, and whether the procedural requirements of notice and hearing were complied with.
Final Decision
The court allowed the writ petition and quashed the order dated 18.7.2011 passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Osmanabad, directing closure of the petitioner's hotel. Rule made absolute.
Law Points
- Section 18(1) of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act
- 1956 requires repeated or habitual use of premises for prostitution
- not a solitary incident
- closure order must be based on evidence of proximity to public place and opportunity for hearing
- show cause notice must specify grounds clearly.
Case Details
2011 LawText (BOM) (08) 11
Criminal Writ Petition No. 589 of 2011
Shri C.K. Shinde for Petitioner, Smt. S.D. Shelke, A.P.P. for Respondents
Ajay s/o Manmathappa Shete
The State of Maharashtra, The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Osmanabad, The Sub Divisional Police Officer, Osmanabad
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal writ petition challenging an order of closure of hotel under Section 18(1) of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956.
Remedy Sought
Quashing of the order dated 18.7.2011 passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Osmanabad, directing closure of the petitioner's hotel Pratham Lodge.
Filing Reason
The petitioner was served with a show cause notice dated 17.2.2011 alleging that in July 2010, the premises were used for allowing prostitutes to use rooms, and that the premises were within 200 meters of public places. After the petitioner's reply, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate passed the closure order on 18.7.2011.
Previous Decisions
The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Osmanabad, passed the order dated 18.7.2011 directing closure of the hotel.
Issues
Whether a solitary incident of allowing prostitution in a lodge is sufficient to invoke Section 18(1) of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 for closure of premises.
Whether the procedural requirements of notice and hearing were complied with, and whether the show cause notice sufficiently specified the grounds for action.
Submissions/Arguments
The incident reported is only a solitary one and only one case is registered against the accused person under the ITP Act.
No case is registered against the manager Arvind Laxman Hiware, who admitted to allowing one Gunwant Papa Deshmukh to bring different women.
Ratio Decidendi
Section 18(1) of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 requires that the premises be used 'as a place of resort for the purposes of prostitution', which implies repeated or habitual use, not a single isolated incident. A solitary case of allowing prostitution does not attract Section 18(1) for closure of the hotel. Additionally, the authority must establish that the premises are within 200 meters of a public place, and the show cause notice must clearly specify the grounds for proposed action.
Judgment Excerpts
The incident reported is only and solitary and one case is registered against the accused person under the provisions of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956.
No case is registered against Shri Arvind Laxman Hiware who is the Manager of the Petitioner's hotel Pratham, and who admitted before the Police in the course of investigation that he had allowed one Gunwant Papa Deshmukh r/of Dhoki, to bring different women.
Procedural History
The Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Osmanabad, issued a show cause notice dated 17.2.2011 to the petitioner. The petitioner submitted a reply on 1.3.2011. After considering the reply, the Sub-Divisional Magistrate passed the order dated 18.7.2011 directing closure of the hotel. The petitioner then filed Criminal Writ Petition No. 589 of 2011 before the Bombay High Court, Bench at Aurangabad, which was heard and allowed on 20.8.2011.
Acts & Sections
- Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956: 18(1)
