Bombay High Court
AMOL KISAN DHATRAKversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
A customer who is not the owner or manager of a premises cannot be held liable under the cited provisions, and the FIR against the applicant must be quashed.
Summary
The applicant, Amol Kisan Dhatrak, was arrested as a customer during a police raid on Yuan Thai Spa & Salon, which was alleged to be operating as a brothel. An FIR was filed under Sections 143(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3, 4, 5 and 7 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956. The applicant contended that he was merely a regular member receiving therapeutic massages and not the owner or manager of the premises. The court examined the statements of the masseuses and the charge‑sheet and found no incriminating material linking the applicant to the prohibited acts. Concluding that he was a bona‑fide customer with no nexus to the alleged offenses, the court quashed the FIR and set aside the proceedings against him.
Issues considered
- Whether a customer of a massage parlour can be held liable under Sections 143(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Sections 3, 4, 5 and 7 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956.
- Whether the FIR and charge‑sheet filed against the applicant are maintainable in the absence of any incriminating evidence.
- Whether the material on record establishes the applicant’s participation in the alleged offensive acts.
Legislation cited
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — s. 143(2), 3(5)
- Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 — s. 3, 4, 5, 7
Subjects
- quash FIR
- customer liability
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita
- Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act
- brothel
- criminal application
- Maharashtra
Judgment
65. CRI APL-564-26.odt
Amberkar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 564 OF 2026
Amol Kisan Dhatrak .. Applicant
Versus
State of Maharashtra .. Respondent
....................
Mr. Niranjan Mundargi a/w Keral Mehta i/by Anusha Pradhan
Jaibhave, Advocates for Applicant
Mr. Y.M. Nakhawa, APP for State
Ms. Rupali Sanap, PSI, Chembur Police Station
...................
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV, J.
DATE : SEPTEMBER 24, 2026
P. C.:
1. Heard Mr. Mundargi, learned Advocate for Applicant and Mr.
Nakhawa, learned APP for State.
2. The present Application seeks quashing of the FIR i.e. C.R. No.
616 of 2025 registered with Chembur Police Station, Mumbai on
receiving the secret information about commission of the offenses
under Section 143(2) and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023
(BNS) and Sections 3, 4, 5 & 7 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention)
Act, 1956 (for short "said Act").
3. Insofar as the crime in question is concerned, there are several
accused persons. The case of the prosecution is that the subject place
in question called Yuan Thai Spa & Salon situated in Jagdish
1 of 4
65. CRI APL-564-26.odt
Bungalow, Plot No. 185, Road No. 15, Chembur Gavthan, Chembur,
Mumbai was indulging in running a brothel under the guise of a
massage center.
4. Applicant before me indicted for aforesaid crime. However on
the face of record, the provisions of the said Act would not apply
because he is not the owner or manager of the subject immovable
property. Applicant claims to have membership of the said massage
center and was a regular customer which is prima facie seen from the
material which is placed on record and there is no ambiguity about it.
5. On the fateful day of the raid, that is on 27.10.2025 in the
evening time, the Applicant was availing the services in the said salon
and was apprehended along with the masseuse. The statements of the
masseuse recorded on 05.11.2025 and 11.11.2025 subsequently are
appended at page Nos. 213 and 263 of the Application. I have
perused the same. With the able assistance of Mr. Mundargi, I have
also perused the other statements which have been recorded by the
investigating authority.
6. Prima facie, insofar as the Applicant before me is concerned,
there is nothing incriminating which has been shown to me or appears
from the record to be having been indulging in any of the offensive
acts as contemplated by the provisions of Section 143(2) of the BNS.
2 of 4
65. CRI APL-564-26.odt
The statements which are recorded of the other masseuses as well as
the masseuse involved with the Applicant in question, prima facie
show that the massage services were rendered to the customers, the
Applicant being one of them.
7. Insofar as applicability of the impugned provision is concerned,
the prosecution can undoubtedly make out a watertight case qua the
owner and the operator of the said place provided it has prima facie
substantive material to show the offensive acts. A customer availing
services by the professional salons which is prima facie case made out
from the various statements which are recorded and the entire
material placed before me do not show any implication of the
Applicant having been indulging in any of the offensive acts or crime
as contemplated under the said FIR qua him.
8. The role of the Applicant, as attributed to him, is seen from page
No. 96 of the chargesheet in the present Application and prima facie
on reading the same, there is nothing incriminating which can be
made attributable to the Applicant or for that matter to the service
provider either. Therefore, in that view of the matter, the record prima
facie shows that the said message outlet called Yuan Thai Spa & Salon
has other branches also and most of the professional service providers
therein are foreigners i.e. from Thailand. In that view of the matter, I
am inclined to accept the submissions made by Mr. Mundargi that
3 of 4
65. CRI APL-564-26.odt
Applicant was a bonafide customer having been found at the wrong
place at the wrong time without having any proximity or nexus to the
alleged crime in question. Record also shows that Applicant was
registered member of this particular spa on the basis of his mobile
number which is seen from the record. It also shows that he was a
regular at the said parlor for undergoing back, neck, and shoulder
massages due to his tedious and strenuous workload.
9. In view of the above, present Application allowed in terms of
prayer clause (a) and (b) which reads thus:-
"a. To quash and set aside the order of cognizance dated 06.02.2026
passed by the Ld. JMFC Court Mazgaon in PW case No. 139 of 2026
for the offences punishable under Sections 143(2), 3(5) of the
Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and Section 3, 4, 5 & 7 of the
Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 against the Applicant;
b. This Hon'ble Court be pleased to quash and set aside the entire
proceedings arising out of FIR No. 0616 of 2025 which was
registered with Chembur Police Station dated 28.10.2025 along
with the chargesheet for offences punishable under Sections 143(2),
3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS) and Section 3, 4, 5
& 7 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 in the interest of
justice qua the Applicant;"
10. Criminal Application is allowed and disposed.
Amberkar [ MILIND N. JADHAV, J. ]
Digitally
signed by
RAVINDRA
RAVINDRA MOHAN
MOHAN AMBERKAR
AMBERKAR Date:
2026.09.24
18:55:44
+0530
4 of 4
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.