Sex Work Not An Offence, Detention Of An Adult Sex Worker For No Reason Infringes Fundamental Rights Under Article 19: Mumbai Court
Indulging in sex work is itself not an offence but prostitution in a public place can be an offence, a Sessions Court observed while ordering the release of a 34-year-old alleged sex worker from a shelter home.Additional Sessions Judge CV Patil set aside a magistrate’s order to detain the woman at the Navjeevan Mahila Vastigriha, Deonar for one year for her care and protection considering...
Indulging in sex work is itself not an offence but prostitution in a public place can be an offence, a Sessions Court observed while ordering the release of a 34-year-old alleged sex worker from a shelter home.
Additional Sessions Judge CV Patil set aside a magistrate’s order to detain the woman at the Navjeevan Mahila Vastigriha, Deonar for one year for her care and protection considering her involvement in a previous incident of prostitution. The order was passed under section 17 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act.
“She has right to do work. As per rule to involve in sex work is not itself an offence but to do sex work in public place so as to cause annoyance to others can be called as offence,” the judge observed.
Moreover, the woman had two minor children, the judge noted. “…Certainly they need their mother and if the victim is detained against her wish certainly it curtails her right to move freely all over India.”
The court was hearing the woman’s appeal under section17(6) of PITA and requested her release on executing a PR bond till final hearing of the appeal.
On March 15, 2023 the Metropolitan Magistrate ordered the woman’s detention for a year but allowed the release of the remaining two victims arrested during a raid.
The woman claimed that she has two minor children and denied indulging in any immortal activities. She said magistrate failed to consider her age or her right to residence under Article 19 of the Constitution of India.
The State responded to the appeal and called the victim a repeat offender. They submitted that she had already given an undertaking to the Bhandup police about not indulging in sex work. Despite the undertaking she was found indulging in sex work again by the Mulund police, it was argued.
Along with the victim, her husband also filed a custody case.
The court relied on the Supreme Court judgement in Budhadev Karmaskar vs The State of West Bengal which discussed right of sex workers and also gave directions to State Government to conduct surveys and to release adult victims who were found detained against their wishes in Protective Homes.
The Supreme Court held that sex workers are entitled for equal protection. When there is a raid on any brothel, since voluntary sex is not illegal only running the brothel is unlawful.
The court denied to hand over the woman’s custody to her husband on the ground that she was an adult and could move freely considering her fundamental rights under Article 19 of the Constitution of India. “Though custody is claimed by husband but considering her age i.e. 34 years she is at liberty to reside and move freely wherever she feels necessary.”
“Under Article 19(1)(d) right to move freely through out territory of India and under Article 19(1)(e) right to reside and settle in any part of the territory of India are the fundamental rights of Indian citizen. The victim is major she is citizen of India and therefore she possesses this rights and if the victim is detained without reason then it can be said that her right to move freely and right to reside and settle are infringed,” the court said in its order.
Case no. – Cri Appeal No 223 OF 2023
Case title – XYZ vs State of Maharashtra