Brothel customer can be booked under Immoral Traffic Act for procuring person for prostitution: Kerala High Court

The Kerala High Court recently held that a customer in a brothel can be hauled up in a case under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 (ITP Act). [Abhijith v. State of Kerala].Justice PG Ajithkumar noted that while the ITP Act does not define the word "procure", Section 5 of the Act penalises "procuring, inducing or taking person for the sake of prostitution".Therefore, the Court opined that the word has to be understood in the context in which it is used and bearing in mind the object of the statute. Viewed as such, the Court concluded that a customer or consumer at a brothel is punishable under Section 5 of the ITP Act. "The principal object of the Statute mentioned in the Statement of Objects and Reasons is to prevent commercialisation of the vices and trafficking among women and girls. The meaning of ‘procure’ given in Merriam Webster Dictionary is to get possession of; or to obtain something. If the said meaning of the word ‘procure’ is understood in the context of the aforesaid objective of the Statute, the person, who gets or obtains domain over a person for the purpose of prostitution, has to be said to procure a person for the purpose of prostitution. In that view of the matter, a consumer also comes within the purview of Section 5 of the ITP Act," the Court explained in its judgment. .The judgment was rendered on a criminal revision petition moved by a man who was found as a customer at a brothel. He was arrayed as an accused in a crime registered by the police alleging offences under Sections 3 (keeping a brothel or allowing premises to be kept as a brothel), 4 (living on the earnings of prostitution), 5 (procuring, inducing or taking a person for prostitution), and 7 (prostitution in or in the vicinity of public places) of the ITP Act. .The petitioner first filed a discharge application before a magistrate court, but the same was dismissed and charges were directed to be framed against him. He moved the High Court in appeal against this decision..Upon going through the provisions of the ITP Act and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court discharged the petitioner for the offences under Sections 3, 4 and 7. However, it held that the petitioner is liable to be charged with the offence under Section 5. .[Read Judgment]