Case Note & Summary
The appellants, Salauddin Abdul Wahid Khan and his wife Asma Salauddin Khan, were convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay, in Sessions Case No. 317 of 2014 for the offence punishable under Section 370 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentenced to seven years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500 each. The prosecution alleged that the appellants, who were acquainted with the victim (Ms. X, PW2), proposed marriage to her, which was rejected by her mother. In February 2014, the appellants asked the victim to accompany them to Mumbai for the Hajimalang Baba Urus festival. The victim stayed with them in Mumbai, and on 18 February 2014, appellant No.1 was missing for the whole day. On 19 February 2014, he asked the victim to sit near a temple and brought a three-month-old child. The prosecution claimed that the appellants intended to traffic the victim for exploitation. However, the victim's testimony did not support the prosecution's case. She stated that she voluntarily accompanied the appellants to Mumbai and was not forced into any illegal activity. The court found that the prosecution failed to prove the essential ingredients of Section 370 IPC, which requires inducement, coercion, or exploitation for forced labour or prostitution. The mere movement of the victim from one place to another, without evidence of exploitation, did not constitute trafficking. The court held that the conviction was based on surmises and conjectures and was unsustainable. Consequently, the appeals were allowed, the conviction and sentence were set aside, and the appellants were ordered to be released forthwith unless required in any other case.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Human Trafficking - Section 370 Indian Penal Code - Essential Ingredients - The prosecution must prove that the accused induced, coerced, or exploited the victim for forced labour or prostitution. Mere movement of a person from one place to another, without evidence of such exploitation, does not constitute trafficking. In this case, the victim voluntarily accompanied the appellants to Mumbai for a religious festival and there was no evidence of any inducement or exploitation. Held that the conviction under Section 370 IPC was unsustainable (Paras 1-10). B) Evidence Law - Appreciation of Evidence - Testimony of Victim - The victim's testimony did not support the prosecution's case of trafficking. She stated that she went to Mumbai voluntarily and was not forced into any illegal activity. The court found that the prosecution failed to establish the essential ingredients of the offence. Held that the conviction was based on surmises and conjectures (Paras 5-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the appellants under Section 370 of the Indian Penal Code for human trafficking is sustainable in the absence of evidence of exploitation or inducement for forced labour or prostitution.
Final Decision
Appeals allowed. Conviction and sentence set aside. Appellants ordered to be released forthwith unless required in any other case.
Law Points
- Section 370 IPC requires proof of inducement
- coercion
- or exploitation for forced labour or prostitution
- mere transportation or movement of a person without evidence of exploitation does not constitute trafficking
- conviction cannot be based on presumption without substantive evidence.
