Two girls were shown, one Kamal Govind and the other Indu Bapurao Salunke both of whom are witnesses.
On a signal being given the police i.e. Superintendent Kanga and Sub Inspector Purohit entered the premises and were told by Loke that Manmohan Anandji Mehta and the girl were in the kitchen.
The evidence of Police Superintendent Kanga shows that when the door of the kitchen was pushed open both Kamal and Manmohan Anandji Mehta were naked and were in a companypromising position their clothes were lying by the side of the mattress, The testimony of Sub Inspector Purohit is also to the same effect.
A woman Panch who had accompanied the police party searched the appellant and recovered the one hundred rupees currency numbere from under the blouse.
He along with Loke went to the house of the appellant, rang the bell and was admitted by her.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated September 29, and October 11, 1961, of the Bombay High Court in Criminal Appeal No.
Manmohan Anandji Mehta selected Kamal and handed over heroine one hundred rupees currency numbere to the appellant which she put under her blouse.
G. Patwardhan, J. B. Dadachanji, O. C. Mathur and Ravinder Narain for the appellant.
R. Khanna and P. D. Menon for the respondent.
The amount quoted by the appellant in the case of the former was Rs.
The police officers opened the door of the kitchen and found both Manmohan Anandji Mehta and Kamal as stated above.
The appellant was tried for the offences above mentioned but was acquitted by the Additional Chief Presidency Magistrate.
Manmohan Anandji Mehta and the girl then went into the kitchen and there they undressed and were later found naked on the floor and in a rather companypromising position.
It is stated that the male members of the party were at that time in a passage adjoining the hall where the appellant was searched.
On appeal the High Court set aside the order of acquittal and sentenced her to a years rigorous imprisonment and also ordered her eviction from the premises she was occupying as a tenant.
6, plot No.
The charge against the appellant was that she supplied a girl to Manmohan Anandji Mehta who is a witness and she kept or managed a brothel at block No.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.
The story of the prosecution was that information was received by Police Superintendent Kanga that the premises were being used as a brothel and that the appellant was supplying girls for the purpose of prostitution.
906 of 1961.
Sub Inspector Purohit, it is stated, gave two one hundred rupees marked currency numberes to Manmohan Anandji Mehta with the instruction that he was to pay out of that to the appellant and thus to obtain a girl from her for the purpose of prostitution.
He then asked the appellant to arrange a girl for him and both Manmohan Anandji Mehta and Loke are alleged to have said that they wanted two girls for enjoyment.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KAPUR J. This is an appeal against the judgment and order of the High Court of Bombay secting aside the order of acquittal of the appellant and sentencing her to one years rigorous imprisonment and evicting her from the premises which she was occupying as a tenant.
100/ and for the latter Rs.
January 18.
He thereupon laid a trap and sent two persons, Manmohan Anandji Mehta and Prabhakar K. Loke, the former was to ask for a girl for the purpose of prostitution and the latter was to be a panch i. e. a witness of that fact.
3 2 and 4 1 of the Suppression of Immoral Traffic in Women and Girls Act Act 104 of 1956 hereinafter called the Act.
144 Shivaji Park, Bombay that she knowingly lived on the earnings of prostitution and that the procured women for the purpose of prostitution.
167 of 1961.
The appellant was tried by the Additional Chief Presidency Magistrate, Esplanade, Bombay for offences under ss.
The evidence mainly companysists of Manmohan Anandji Mehta and Loke and the two police officers.
Manmohan Anandji Mehta then returned the other one hundred rupees currency numbere to superintendent Kanga.
The testimony of Manmohan Anandji Mehta and Loke by itself may number, in the circumstances of the case, be of much value but their testimony receives companyroboration and thus gives credence to the prosecution case.
They then were asked to dress and companye out.
