LexBUDHADEV KARMASKAR versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2012] 7 S.C.R. 881 .• BUDHADEV KARMASKAR A V. STATE OF WEST BENGAL (Criminal Appeal No. 135 of 2010) JULY 26, 2012 B [ALTAMAS KABIR AND GYAN SUDHA MISRA, JJ.] Sex Workers - Rehabilitation of - Application filed on behalf of Union of India, for modification of earlier order passed by Supreme Court on 19th July, 2011, referring certain c issues to the Committee constituted by the said order itself - First modification sought was deletion of Durbar Mahi/a Samanwaya Samiti, from the panel on the ground that it had been actively advocating revocation of the Immoral Traffic(Prevention) Act, 1956, and also recognition of sex trade D and that continuance of such Samiti in the panel was giving a wrong impression to the public that the Union of India was also inclined to think on similar lines and this wrong impression should be removed by excluding the Samiti from the panel - Second modification sought was with regard to the third term of reference: "(3) Conditions conducive for sex E workers who wish to continue working as sex workers with dignity" on the ground that wording of such reference could be suitably modified so as not to give an impression that the Union of India was in favour of encouraging the sex workers, F in contravention of the provisions of the aforesaid Act - Held: The presence of the Samiti in the Committee is necessary even to function as a sounding board in respect of the problems faced by the sex workers and therefore prayer of Union of India for deleting the Samiti from the Committee is G rejected - No difference would be made to the terms of reference, if the wording of the third term of reference, is modified to the following effect:-"Conditions conducive for sex workers to live with dignity in accordance with the provisions 881 H 882 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [20121 7 S.C.R. A of Article 21 of the Constitution." - Said modification, should not, however, be construed to mean that by this order, any attempt is being made to encourage prostitution in any way - Immoral Traffic(Prevention) Act, 1956. CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal B No. 135 of 2010. From the Judgment & Order dated 25.07.2007 of the High Court of Calcutta in CRA No. 487 of 2004. Solicitor General of India (AC), P.P. Malhotra, ASG, C Pradip Ghosh (AC), Jayant Bhushan (AC), T.S. Doabia, Ashok Bhan, A. Mariarputham, Anand Grover with Tripti Tandon, Manjit Singh, Jayant K. Sud, Dr. Manish Singhvi, AAG, Pijush K. Roy, Pallav Mongia, D.S. Mahra, Gaurav Sharma, Sushma Suri, Satya Siddiqui, S.K. Mishra, Sunita Sharma, Sadhana Sandhu, D M. Khairati, S. Wasim, A. Qadri, Anjani Aiyagari, Gunwant Dara, B.V. Balramdas, B.K. Prasad, Manpreet Singh Doabia, Kiran Bhardwaj, Tarjit Singh, Kamal Mohan Gupta, Riku Sarna, Navnit Kumar (for Corporate Law Group), Asha Gopalan Nair, Mukul Singh, Pragati Neekhra Singh, Khawairakpam Nobin E Singh, Sapam Biswajit Meitei, Edward Belho, Amit Kumar Singh, K. Enatoli Serna, Sunil Fernandes, Gopal Singh, Atul Jha, Sandeep Jha, Dharmendra Kumar Sinha, A. Subhashini, Anil Srivastav, Rituraj Biswas, Radha Shyam Jena, V.G. Pragasam, S.J. Aristotel, Praburamasubramanian, Jatinder F Kumar Bhatia, Mukesh Verma, Chanchal Kr. Ganguli, Abhijit Sengupta, Harendra Singh, Kuldip Singh, D. Mahesh Babu, Mayur R. Shah, Suchitra H., Amit K. Nain, Aruna Mathur, Yusuf Khan, Movita (for Arputham, Aruna & Co.), K.N. Madhusoodhanan, M.T. George, Liz Mathew, Sana Hashmi, G Hemantika Wahi, Abhishek Sood, Rohit Kumar Singh, Savita Singh, Amritananda Chakravorty, Ranjan Mukherjee, S. Bhowmick, S.C. Ghosh, Garima Bose, lrshad Ahmad, Balaji Srinivasan, Anitha Shenoy, C.D. Singh, Abhimanyu Singh, Anil K. Jha, Chhaya Kumari, Vibha Dutt Makhija, ANil Katiyar, P.V. Dinesh, Aniruddha P. Mayee, Subramonium Prasad for the H BUDHADEV KARMASKAR v. STATE OF WEST 883 BENGAL appearing parties. A The order of the Court was delivered by ALTAMAS KABIR, J. 1. CRLMP.N0.12415 of 2012, has been filed on behalf of the Union of India, for modification of the order passed by this Court on 19th July, 2011, referring s certain issues to the Committee which had been constituted by the said order itself. 2. The first modification sought by the Union of India is for deletion of the Durbar Mahila Samanwaya Samiti, from the panel. The second modification sought is with regard to the C third term of reference, which reads as follows:- "(3) Conditions conducive for se
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.