The victim alleged that she lived with Pushpa for five months and thereafter, the accused brought her to G B Road and forced her into prostitution and also threatened her.
She alleged that Pushpa did not allow her to go out of the brothel and all her earnings were kept by her.
In her statement before a magistrate, the victim had claimed that Pushpa and Lata forced her into prostitution and both of them aided and abetted customers at the brothel to forcibly establish sexual relations with her.
The court said prosecution has completely failed to prove that the victim was brought to Delhi by Pushpa from Andhra Pradesh or that she was wrongfully confined at the brothel where she was forced into prostitution.
There is also no evidence to hold that Pushpa used to take away the earnings so procured from prostitution by the victim, the court said.
Pulling up the police, the court said it was beyond comprehension as to why the agency chose to remain silent with regard to ownership of the brothel, even though as per their charge sheet, there was evidence in the form of statement of the victim that a brothel was in fact being run in the premises at Kotha no 56 at G B Road.
"The probe agency, for reasons best known to them, apparently made no efforts whatsoever to bring before the court any evidence either in the form of documents from Municipal records etc. or otherwise, to establish as to who is the owner of the building where the brothel is being run.
"Certainly, the probe agency cannot be said to be oblivious to the fact that being the owner, landlord, besides
being tenant, the lessee or occupier of a brothel house is itself an offence as per the provisions of section 3 of ITP Act," the court said.
