JUDGEMENT The applicants were convicted under Section 8 for soliciting prostitution. 2. It is the case of the prosecution that on the day of the incident, as Seva Das and party came near the house one of the applicants said to one of the panch witnesses the words "ya mure corrumhea mure". According to the prosecution these words constitute soliciting prostitution. 3. The prosecution examined P. W. 2 the panch witness who accompanied the search party but did not examine the panch witness, to whom, according to the prosecution the words were uttered. It is not stated specifically who was the accused-applicant who uttered the words. It is argued by Shri Anacleto Viegas that besides the lacuna caused by the fact that the very witness to whom the words were addressed had not been examined, there is a fact that the words "ya mure corrumhea mure" are not sufficient to indicate that there was any soliciting. I agree with Shri Viegas. The failure of the prosecution to examine the person to whom the words were addressed also creates a doubt the benefit of which should go to the applicants. 4. The Special Officer, Seva Das searched the house where the accused were staying. The search was conducted under Section 15 of Suppression of Immoral Traffic in Women and Girls Act, 1956. That section requires that when a Special Officer conducts such search he should be accompanied by at least one respectable woman from the locality in which the place to be searched is situated, to attend and witness the search. 5. A pertinent point was raised by Shri Viegas and that is that the search was conducted by Seva Das accompanied by two male panch witnesses and that the requirement that at least one of the witnesses should be a female from the locality was not complied with. Shri Viegas states that the failure to comply with this essential requirement vitiates the entire proceedings and that this vice was by itself sufficient for acquitting the applicants. Here again I find myself in agreement with Shri Viegas.He has relied on Public Prosecutor, Andhra Pradesh v. Uttarayalli Nageswararao (AIR 1965 Andh Pra 176) and T. Jacob v. State of Kerala ( AIR 1971 Ker 166 ). Both the rulings are to the point and support the case of Shri Viegas. 6. Here again I find myself in agreement with Shri Viegas.He has relied on Public Prosecutor, Andhra Pradesh v. Uttarayalli Nageswararao (AIR 1965 Andh Pra 176) and T. Jacob v. State of Kerala ( AIR 1971 Ker 166 ). Both the rulings are to the point and support the case of Shri Viegas. 6. In the circumstances I allow the appeal, set aside the order of the trial Court and acquit the accused. Appeal allowed.