The Kerala High Court ruled that sex workers cannot be treated as commodities, holding that customers in brothels can be prosecuted for inducing prostitution under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
Kerala: In a landmark ruling, the Kerala High Court has held that individuals availing sexual services in brothels can be prosecuted under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 (ITP Act). Justice V.G. Arun, delivering the judgment, made it clear that sex workers cannot be reduced to “commodities” and that those paying for such services are active participants in exploitation.
The Case Background
On March 18, 2021, police raided a house in Thiruvananthapuram and found the petitioner, Sarath Chandran, in a compromising position with a woman. Another couple was discovered in a separate room. Investigation revealed that two individuals were managing the premises as a brothel, charging ₹2,000 per hour, of which ₹1,000 went to the women.
Chandran was charged under Sections 3 (keeping a brothel), 4 (living on earnings of prostitution), 5(1)(d) (inducing prostitution), and 7 (prostitution in or near public places) of the ITP Act. He moved the High Court seeking to quash these charges, claiming he was merely a “customer” and not engaged in running the trade.
ALSO READ: Government Bans 25 OTT Platforms Including Ullu, ALTT, For Violating Content Laws
The Arguments
Petitioner’s stand:
He was only availing services; earlier High Court rulings had held that customers could not be booked under Sections 5 or 7.
Prosecution’s stand:
The charges must be tested at trial, but the payment itself amounted to an inducement.
Court’s Observations
Justice Arun undertook a detailed analysis of the object and history of the ITP Act, noting its purpose was to prevent human trafficking and commercial sexual exploitation.
Highlights from the judgment:
On “customers”:
“To be a customer a person should buy some goods or services. A sex worker cannot be denigrated as a product. In most cases, they are lured into the trade through human trafficking and compelled to offer his/her body to satisfy the carnal pleasure of others.”
On payment as inducement:
“The pleasure seeker may be paying money, a large chunk of which goes to the keeper of the brothel. The payment therefore can only be perceived as an inducement to make the sex worker offer his/her body.”
On liability: Those availing sex services at brothels are not mere passive consumers but inducers of prostitution, and therefore liable under Section 5(1)(d).
Final Decision:
- Charges under Sections 3 & 4 (brothel-keeping and living off prostitution earnings) were quashed, since the petitioner was not running the establishment.
- Charges under Sections 5(1)(d) & 7 were upheld, making it clear that “clients” can be prosecuted if they induce or exploit sex workers, particularly in brothels or prohibited areas.
Appearance:
For the petitioner: Advocate CS Sumesh
For the state: Senior Public Prosecutor Pushpalatha MK
Case Title:
Sarath Chandran v State of Kerala
CRL.MC NO. 8198 OF 2022
Read Order:
Click Here to Read More Reports On Kerala High Court
