The Karnataka High Court quashed an FIR under Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act against two men who were running a lodge over allegations of carrying prostitution at the premises, after noting that the raiding party was not accompanied by women as mandated by the provisions.

Consequently, Justice Venkatesh Naik T allowed the criminal petition filed by the two men.

Referring to several rulings of Karnataka High Court, including Mr. Praveen Kumar M.S. vs State of Karnataka, the Court said that provisions of Section 15(2) of the ITP Act are mandatory in nature as per which the raiding party shall accompanied by a women and another pancha (witness) shall be a person from the locality.

“So also, it is evident that in the case on hand the investigating officer had not taken a woman along with the raiding party for the purpose of raid. Section 12(2) of the Act is mandatory in nature. There cannot be any doubt that in the absence of any averments in the mahazar that no woman was available or no person of the locality was available, such a raid cannot be permitted to the basis of any prosecution,” the Court said.

The Court also took note that the investigation in the case was not carried out by a Special Police Officer, as mandated under the Act.

“It is evident that the provisions of Section 2(i) of ITP Act lay down that only a Special Police Officer is empowered to investigate the matter. It appears that there is no such notification issued by the Government wherein a Police Officer of the rank of the Circle Inspector of Police/Police Inspector or Dy.S.P. of the Police Stations are the Special Police Officers within the meaning of 2(i) of the ITP Act,” the Court said.

It added, “In the absence of any such powers conferred upon the Police Officers, it cannot be said that the Police Inspectors of all the Police Stations are the Special Police Officers within the meaning of Section 2(i) of the ITP Act.”

The police had raided a lodge after receiving information that it was used for carrying prostitution. The raid was conducted by a Police Sub-Inspector of Athani Police Station on July 27, 2026. A spot mahazar was conducted, articles were seized, and a complaint was registered, leading to criminal proceedings against the petitioner (accused) before the Principal Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC, Athani, for offences punishable under Sections 3, 4, and 5 of the ITP Act. Aggrieved by this, the accused approached the High Court.

The High Court quashed the criminal proceedings, noting that its continuation would amount to abuse of process of law.