#Immoral Traffic Prevention Act

Bombay High Court reinforces that the presence of minor girls in a brothel triggers an irrebuttable presumption of offence under Section 6 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act. The ruling limits the scope of revisional jurisdiction in cases involving heinous offences against minors, setting a strict precedent for human trafficking prosecutions.

The Bombay High Court held that mere ownership of a premises where prostitution occurs, without evidence of active involvement or exploitation, does not justify denial of bail when the victim is an adult. This clarifies the threshold for criminal liability under the new Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Immoral Traffic Prevention Act, protecting property owners from automatic presumption of guilt.

Bombay HC clarifies that property owners cannot be held criminally liable under the Immoral Traffic Prevention Act solely for leasing premises, absent proof of knowledge or complicity. The court granted anticipatory bail conditional on cooperation, reinforcing that vicarious liability requires active involvement or mens rea.

Kerala High Court grants pre-arrest bail in ITPA case, holding that prosecution fails to establish 'brothel' under Section 2(a) and custodial interrogation is unnecessary.

Bombay High Court quashes FIR against accused merely present at brothel, holding that absence of victim's statement or procurement evidence negates offences under ITPA and BNS.