The very case of Budhdev karmaskar v. State of West Bengal have paved 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 and head.

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.

Issue Raised?

• 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 them?

Arguments made by the appellant:

• 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 cross examination.
• 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:

• 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.

Judgement made by the court

• 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.

Conclusion
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.