During the days of the East India Company of the British Raj, the Company had regulations dealing with sex offences. In 1668, the Company issued regulations against prostitution, known as 'Company Commandments'. Compliance of these regulations was required strictly. During the years 1669 and 1677, Governor Anguri issued orders for the control of brothels and for the prevention of soldiers from keeping wenches and loose women. This was for the first time that brothel came under the purview of law during the British Raj. Before the year 1860, there were a few regulations on the subject.

In 1860, the Indian Penal Code was enacted. Sections 372 and 373 were intended to prevent induction of women in prostitution under a certain age and against their wish. The Contagious Diseases Act, 1868, aimed at compulsory examination of common prostitutes and their detention in hospitals till they were cured. This law proved nauseatingly irksome. As a result, it was repealed in 1888. The Presidency Towns Police Acts and District Police Acts made certain acts relating to prostitution penal.

It was during the later half of the 19th Century that the Government of India took notice of the evils of prostitution. It was primarily because the Government was concerned about the health of the British soldiers who indulged in the vice of prostitution. The problem of prostitution was looked upon as a public health menace as well and also as a law and order problem. In 1892, the British House of Commons appointed a Committee to enquire into the practice of prostitution in India and also into the spread of venereal diseases. It was found that special arrangements were made for the supply of women. Medical check up and segregation till the women were cured, was the usual practice. All such efforts were, however, not considered adequate. More vigorous steps were, therefore, felt necessary.

An Act, aimed at discontinuance of brothels, titled the East Bengal and Assam Disorderly Houses Act, 1907, was enacted. That Act was applicable to certain areas of East Bengal and Assam. It provided for the prosecution of the brothel keepers with the sanction of the District Magistrate or on a report of the Chairman of Municipality or on a complaint of three or more persons living in the neighbourhood. For verifying facts, police were empowered to inspect such houses. For some years after this Act, no action of great significance was taken regarding this subject.

In 1923, the Calcutta Suppression of Immoral Traffic Act and the Bombay Prevention of Prostitution Act were passed. The Bengal Suppression of Immoral Traffic Act, 1930, replaced the Calcutta Act. In 1923, the province of U.P. enacted legislation for the suppression of immoral traffic in women and girls, followed by Punjab in 1935 and Mysore in 1936.

Heavy penalties were provided by these Acts for living on the earnings of prostitution, for keeping a brothel, for allowing premises for use as brothel, for procuring, for unlawful detention for prostitution, for importing a woman for prostitution and for encouraging or assisting in prostitution.

Some States enacted laws to deal with specific aspects of prostitution. For example, the U.P. Naik Girls Protection Act and the Bombay Devadasis Act were passed in 1929 and 1934 respectively. The Children Act, passed in Bombay, Madras and Bengal, gave protection to boys and girls in moral danger.

In the global perspective, although prostitution appears to respond to a widespread demand and despite indications that a substantial proportion of prostitutes are victims of social and psychic conditions beyond their control, most people favour penal repression of commercialized sex. Religious and moral ideas are undoubtedly the main forces behind the demand for repression. Utilitarian arguments have it that prostitution is an important source of venereal diseases, although some people contend that the 'amateurs' to whom men turn in place of prostitutes present a great danger in this respect. It has been observed that prostitution is a source of profit and power for criminal groups who commonly combine it with illicit trade in drugs and liqueur, illegal gambling, robbery and extortion.

Prostitution is also a source of common influence on government and law enforcement machinery. Its promoters are willing and able to pay for police protection; and unscrupulous officials and politicians find them an easy mark for extortion. Some view prostitution as a significant factor in social disorganization, encouraging sex delinquency and undermining marriage, the home, and individual character.

There are people who favour regulation of prostitution rather than suppression. They maintain that law cannot eliminate prostitution. Sumptuary laws that cannot be generally enforced lend themselves to extortion, arbitrary and episodic prosecution. Failure to provide professional outlet to male sexuality will result in more rape and other sexual crimes. Registration and periodic health inspection are the best means of controlling venereal diseases, which are much more likely to be spread by the promiscuous amateurs than by professional prostitutes concerned and instructed to avoid infection. Legalised prostitution offers less opportunity for official corruption than unrealistic efforts at total repression. By confining prostitution to particular neighbourhood police surveillance is facilitated and the safety of the general community promoted.

Many of the issues between those who favour repression and those who tolerate some prostitution cannot be resolved on the basis of the ground realities. However, on the question of medical risk, the record is persuasive as well as substantive that inspection of licensed prostitutes would give no assurance against venereal infection.#