47_WP2621_19.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.2621 OF 2019 Arvind Dattatray Khodse … Petitioner Vs. State of Maharashtra and another … Respondents Mr. Satyavrat Joshi for Petitioner. Ms. Kranti T. Hiwrale, APP for Respondent-State. CORAM : MANISH PITALE & SANDESH D. PATIL, JJ. DATE : DECEMBER 12, 2025 P.C. : . Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. By this petition, the petitioner is seeking quashing of FIR No.162 of 2019 registered at Chandannagar Police Station, Pune, for offences under Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956. It is to be noted that although this petition was filed as far back as in the year 2019, not once an effort was made on behalf of the petitioner to have this petition circulated. 3. Be that as it may, today when the petition is taken up for consideration, we are informed that in the meanwhile, charge-sheet has been filed on 25.07.2019. It is surprising that despite the charge-sheet having been filed in the year 2019, till date, charges have not been framed. It is perhaps because of the pendency of this petition, which has not been pursued seriously by the petitioner for the past six years. 4. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. It is urged that the petitioner was working merely as a manager in a Spa, where raid 1/2 MINAL SANDIP PARAB Digitally signed by MINAL SANDIP PARAB Date: 2025.12.12 17:20:11 +0530 47_WP2621_19.doc was conducted and illegal activities were noticed, which led to registration of the aforementioned FIR. It is further submitted that the personnel, who formed the team for conducting the raid, were not authorized in accordance with law to conduct such a raid and therefore, this is an additional ground to seek quashing of the FIR. 5. We have perused the contents of the FIR. We find that prima facie, the ingredients of the offences registered against the petitioner are made out. At this stage, we are not inclined to go into the question of proper authorization of the police personnel, who conducted the raid, as it would be a matter for trial. 6. In view of the above, we find no merit in the present petition and accordingly, it is dismissed. (SANDESH D. PATIL, J.) (MANISH PITALE, J.) 2/2 Minal Parab