The very case of Budhdev karmaskar v. State of West Bengal
the path of right to live with dignity for the sex workers. For the very first
time in this case the justice for the sex worker was in the question.
This case scattered light upon the real and exact state of the sex workers in
our society. The way they are treated and kept apart was discussed. This
particular ruling along with the conviction of the accused, upheld the right of
sex workers to live with dignity as prescribed by our constitution of India
under article 21.
In this case supreme court pointed out that sex workers are a part of our
society and they should be treated as the same. They also have position in the
society and should not be looked down due to there very profession they posses.
Facts of the case:
On the night of 17th September, 1999, a horrible incident took place , where a
prostitute namely, Shrimati Chayay Rani Pal alias buri, aged about 45 years was
brutally murdered by a person named Budhdev karmasker. This incident took place
at the resident of the lady, i.e. at Jogen dutta lane (red light are of Kolkata).
The deceased was sleeping near the staircase that was situated in front of her
room, when she was tripped by the accused. The accused Budhdev assaulted her and
kicked her with legs. During the kicks and assault she started bleeding which
increased when she was trashed by him from her hairs and was pushed towards the
wall many times. As corollary to it, she started bleeding from her ears, nose
Asha khatun, the only eye witness who was present there as the spot, raised the
alarm, due to which many inmates gathered there and watched how recklessly he
(the accused) assaulted her.
No sooner did the crowd gathered her ran from the crime spot, but was recovered
by the police within 5 hours of his rush.
Arguments made by the appellant:
- How article 21 and the meaning of life to live with dignity must be
applied for sex workers and their offsprings?
- How to rescue and provide the sex workers for a safer environment?
- How to protect sex workers from these kind of people who look down to
- The learned counsel who appeared for the appellant denied all the
charges which were set forth by the prosecution.
- The eye witness, Asha Khatun's statement cannot be admissible under
Section 164 of the Criminal procedure code, as she didn't turn up during the
- I was also claimed by the appellant's counsel that no one of the
residents were preent at the crime shook place and therefore, the case made
against his client was all frictional and baseless.
- He pleaded the case to be dismissed and his client must be acquitted.
Arguments Made By The Respondents:
Judgement made by the court
- The case of the prosecution suggested that there existed a quarrel
between the deceased and the accused, which were very sour and the fights
happened very frequent.
- The physician reports were presented by the prosecution, which showed
that the deceased was beaten by figs and legs.
- The deceased had almost 11 injuries on his face and parts of forehead
which resulted in his dead.
- It was shown that out of 11 injuries 8 were enough in the ordinary
course of time to result her death.
- The appeal made by was dismissed by the hon'ble High court of Kolkata.
- The contention that the eye witness's statement is not admissible to be
recorded was struck down and the statements were taken into account.
- Reasonable weightage was attached to the statements made by Asha Khatun
and was proved by her very statement that there existed a sour enmity
between the two due to which they often fight.
- It was also established that the accused tripped over the deceased while
sleeping near the staircase, resulting in the altercation.
- The court believed that the grave injuries inflicted by the accused were
further supported by the post-mortem report prepared by the attending
physician. It was established that the accused's injuries were severe enough
to cause the deceased's death in the normal course of nature.
- The court was also dissatisfied with the fact that there was no
explanation as to why there was an injury near the accused's left eye when
the defence case was pure denial.
From the above landmark case we can just say that every person is equal in the
eyes of law and no one is looked down by the saviors of the justice.
In this case the real light was thrown upon the way the prostitutes are treated
by the demonic people of the so called high society or the so called respected
peoples of the society.
We are not aware about the very condition which lead them in this kind of work,
but that's for sure that they don't work for their happiness , the things or the
conditions which drive them into the hell world may be poverty of some sought of
helplessness, but that doesn't mean that they don't have right to live with
dignity. Dignity of each individual whether a business tycoon or a sweeper or we
can say in this case a sex worker, is protected by the constitution of India
which was very welly shown by the judges.