Court No. - 10 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 21646 of 2013
Petitioner :- Iqrar Ahmad @ Choote And Anr.
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Devraj Rajvedi
Counsel for Respondent :- Govt. Advocate
Hon'ble Arun Tandon,J. Hon'ble Dr. Satish Chandra,J.
Section 18 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 specifically authorizes a Magistrate on receipt of information from the police or otherwise, that any house, room, place or any portion thereof within a distance of two hundred metres of any public place referred to in sub-section (1) of Section 7, he can direct eviction of the occupier within 7 days of passing of the order from the house, room, place or portion. If the Magistrate subsequently finds that the owner, lessor or landlord as well as the agent of the owner, lessor or landlord, was innocent of the improper use of the house, room, place or portion, he may cause the same to be restored to the owner, lessor or landlord, or the agent of the owner, lessor or landlord, with a direction that the house, room, place or portion shall not be leased out, or otherwise given possession of, to or for the benefit of the person who was allowing the improper use therein.
From the order impugned, we find that the Magistrate on receipt of the information that the hotel in question was being used for immoral activities did issue notice to the owner of the hotel to show cause that why direction for eviction under Section 18 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 may not be made. The owner did not respond for the reasons best known to him. One Mr. Ifthikhar Ahmad appeared and claimed that he was the owner of the hotel but he failed to produce any document in support thereof. The Magistrate, therefore, directed that the hotel in question be kept evicted and remain attached for a period of one year. It is against this order that the present writ petition has been filed.
The only ground raised before us is that the proceedings have been taken without any report of the special police Neutral Citation No. - 2014:AHC:79532-DB
1
contemplated by the Act and for the purpose reliance has been place upon the judgement in the case of Delhi Administration Vs Ram Singh reported in 1961 SCEX
00230 .
We are of the considered opinion that the submission of the petitioner is wholly misconceived that power under Section 8 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 cannot be exercised on receipt of the police report or otherwise and further in the facts of the case even the owner did not respond to the notice, which was issued by the Magistrate before making the impugned order for whatever reasons it may be. We find no good ground to interfere in the order impugned. However, it is still open to the owner to respond to the notice and to satisfy the Magistrate concerned that the hotel was used without his consent. The Magistrate shall take appropriate actions in accordance with the proviso of Section 18 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956. With the aforesaid directions/observations, the present writ petition is finally disposed of.
Order Date :- 1.5.2014 himwan
2
Comments