Legal Reasoning Questions for CLAT | QB Set 29

The Karnataka High Court recently highlighted that the primary goal of anti-trafficking laws is to punish traffickers, not sex workers. This observation was made while quashing criminal proceedings against a woman implicated in a 2013 case under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act (ITPA). The woman, along with other girls, had allegedly been coerced into prostitution. Authorities intercepted their vehicle while they were being transported from Udupi to Goa, and they were subsequently charged under Section 5 of the ITPA. In 2024, after a lengthy legal battle, she approached the Karnataka High Court to have the charges against her dropped.

The Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act does not make prostitution illegal in itself but criminalizes activities like running brothels, pimping, soliciting, and inducing someone into prostitution. Prostitution conducted independently or voluntarily is not considered an offense under the ITPA. The Act defines prostitution as “the sexual exploitation or abuse of persons for commercial purposes,” emphasizing two key aspects: exploitation or abuse and sexual activity for commercial gain. Section 5 of the ITPA specifically deals with procuring or inducing someone for prostitution, with penalties ranging from three to seven years of imprisonment and higher if minors are involved.

The court reiterated the need to distinguish between traffickers and victims in ITPA cases. It emphasized that the law’s focus is on combating human trafficking and exploitation, not penalizing individuals who are coerced into prostitution. This ruling reflects the court’s stance on protecting victims of trafficking while ensuring that traffickers face legal consequences for their actions.

Questions 

Question 1:
A group of women is coerced into prostitution by a trafficking gang. The police intercept them while they are being transported to another city, and they are booked under Section 5 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act (ITPA). One of the women argues that she was a victim, not a perpetrator, and seeks to have the charges quashed. Based on the Karnataka High Court’s observations, can the woman be criminally prosecuted under Section 5 of the ITPA?

(a) Yes, because she was involved in prostitution, regardless of coercion.
(b) No, because the ITPA targets traffickers and not victims of coercion.
(c) Yes, because being part of a trafficking operation makes her liable under the law.
(d) No, because prostitution is illegal under the ITPA regardless of whether it is voluntary or coerced.

Question 2:
Ravi is arrested for allegedly procuring women for prostitution, in violation of Section 5 of the ITPA. He claims that the women were willing participants and that he merely helped them travel to another city for work. Under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, what must be proven for Ravi to be convicted under Section 5?

(a) That Ravi was involved in transporting or procuring the women for the purpose of prostitution.
(b) That the women engaged in prostitution voluntarily.
(c) That the women were minors or coerced into prostitution.
(d) That Ravi received payment for arranging the travel of the women.

Question 3:
Shweta runs a small apartment where she rents rooms to women who engage in prostitution. She is charged under the ITPA for keeping a brothel. Shweta argues that the women are independent workers and that she does not control their activities. Does her argument hold under the ITPA?

(a) No, because under the ITPA, keeping premises for prostitution is a criminal offense.
(b) Yes, because prostitution itself is not illegal in India if done voluntarily.
(c) Yes, because Shweta is not directly involved in soliciting customers or coercing the women.
(d) No, because renting out rooms to women engaging in prostitution does not constitute brothel-keeping.

Question 4:
Under the ITPA, what is the maximum punishment for a person convicted of procuring or inducing a minor (under 18 years of age) for prostitution?

(a) Imprisonment for 3 to 7 years and a fine of ₹2,000.
(b) Imprisonment for 7 to 14 years and a fine of ₹2,000.
(c) Imprisonment for 7 years to life and a fine.
(d) Imprisonment for 3 years and no fine.

Question 5:
Leela is accused of soliciting clients in a public area for the purpose of prostitution, which is a criminal offense under the ITPA. She argues that prostitution is not illegal in India, so she cannot be penalized. What is the correct legal position under the ITPA?(a) Leela is correct because prostitution itself is not illegal in India.
(b) Leela is incorrect because soliciting for prostitution in public areas is criminalized under the ITPA.
(c) Leela is correct because her activity does not involve trafficking or coercion.
(d) Leela is incorrect because any form of prostitution is illegal under the ITPA.