The Chandigarh police recently filed a case under Immoral Trafficking Act against a salon owner under a section that does not exist. This emerged after the court of chief judicial magistrate Akshdeep Mahajan sought clarity by DSP Satish Kumar who was summoned on Tuesday.
He said that ‘he thought the section had been notified and it was an inadvertent mistake’.
Later he told HT, “Instead of 5(1)(a), what got written there was 5(a) due to a typo error.” He further said that the clerical mistake will be rectified and challan will be presented.
Section 5 (1) (a) of the 1956 Act deals with prostitution.
The confusion emerged as cops of the Chandigarh police are under the impression that 5(a) had been notified after the Bill came up for discussion in the Parliament, even as some thought that 5(1) (a) was the correct one.
The judge took note of this error when the accused Mehboob applied for bail and questioned whether the section was even notified. The DSP while admitting the mistake said they were under the impression that the section had been notified but it was not so.
The court rejected the bail plea of Mehboob as well as his co-accused Sameer, manager of the salon. The prostitution racket in Manimajra was busted on June 11. The salon, ‘Tressed Up’ is in NAC, Mani Majra.
{{/usCountry}}The court rejected the bail plea of Mehboob as well as his co-accused Sameer, manager of the salon. The prostitution racket in Manimajra was busted on June 11. The salon, ‘Tressed Up’ is in NAC, Mani Majra.
{{/usCountry}}Similar error in other case
Interestingly, the Section 5 (a) of the Immoral Trafficking Act has been included in yet another FIR lodged at Sector 31 police station. Four persons, including three women, were arrested on June 25 from Sector 47 salon. While the owner of the salon, Shalu, was not granted bail, two girls working there, as well as a customer Gaurav were granted bail.