1. FACTS
Chaya Rani Pal, alias Buri, a 45-year-old sex worker who lived in the red-light area of Jogen Dutta Lane, Kolkata, was attacked brutally by Budhadev Karmaskar on the night of 17 September 1999. The attack started when Karmaskar stepped over the sleeping victim and, in the course of a furious exchange of words, assaulted her. He went on to physically attack her with his legs and fists, pulled her by her hair, and kept pounding her head on the wall again and again. The assault caused serious injuries to her, with bleeding from the head, nose, and ear. The assault was seen by Asha Khatun, a maidservant, who was also at the location, and raised an alarm that attracted other occupants. Karmaskar escaped from the spot but was interrogated by the police within half a day. The victim was rushed to the hospital for medical treatment, where she was pronounced dead. The post-mortem examination disclosed eleven injuries, eight of which were enough to cause death naturally.
2. ISSUES RAISED
Whether the eyewitness’s statement of Asha Khatun was dependable even if she did not attend cross-examination under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Whether evidence produced by the prosecution was sufficient to prove the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
Whether sex workers in India were due equal protection and dignity of law under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Whether Section 8 of the West Bengal Prevention of Immoral Trafficking Act, 1950, criminalizing soliciting and living off the proceeds of prostitution, infringed the basic rights of sex workers.
3. CONTENTION
Contentions of the Appellant:
The defense contended that the evidence of Asha Khatun cannot be taken on account of her absence for cross-examination.
The defense also attacked the case of the prosecution on the technical ground that none of the local people were summoned as witnesses, in an attempt to discredit the credibility of the prosecution’s case.
Prosecution’s Contentions:
The prosecution based their case on the medical evidence, which established that eight out of eleven injuries were enough to kill.
The prosecution contended that the eyewitness account supported by medical reports proved the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt.
4. RATIONAL
The court dismissed the grounds of the appellant concerning the unreliability of the eyewitness account, holding that Asha Khatun’s statement was trustworthy and gave a comprehensive description of what had transpired. The court also mentioned that the medical evidence supported the character and seriousness of the injuries caused by the accused, which were enough to result in death. The court pointed out that there was a history of animosity and constant quarrels between the accused and the deceased. The appeal was rejected, and the conviction was confirmed.
On the larger question of the rights of sex workers, the Supreme Court acknowledged that adult, consenting sex workers are entitled to equal protection of the law and ought not to be criminalized merely for being sex workers. The Court gave orders for the safeguarding of sex workers’ rights such as non-disclosure of identity, protection from harassment, and access to government welfare programs. The Court further ordered that Aadhaar cards be provided to sex workers without asking for proof of residence to ease their social reintegration.
5. DEFECTS OF LAW
The case brought out important defects in the law relating to sex work in India. Section 8 of the West Bengal Prevention of Immoral Trafficking Act, 1950, criminalizing solicitation and living on the proceeds of prostitution, was challenged on the grounds that it invaded the constitutional rights of sex workers. The legislation blurred the lines between voluntary sex work and trafficking and resulted in the victimization and ostracization of sex workers. There were no effective rehabilitation programs and social security programs further increasing their vulnerability.
6. INFERENCE
The Budhadev Karmaskar v. State of West Bengal case was a turning point in India in the establishment of sex workers’ rights. The court not only examined the legal liability of the accused but also recognized the underlying social and legal concerns of sex workers. The guidelines of the Supreme Court were designed to provide sex workers with dignity, security, and equal legal protection, marking a progressive turn in the strategy towards sex work in India. Yet, the case also revealed the necessity of holistic legal reforms and proper implementation of welfare measures to protect the rights and well-being of sex workers.