Kamala v. State Represented By Its Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 10-03-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN D. Kamala W /o.Dhasalu No.69/12, ATS Street, Kurinjipadi Neyveli, Cuddalore - 607807.

Petitioner(s) Vs State Represented By Its Inspector Of Police, Kilpauk Police Station, Chennai District (Crime No.34 of 2025) Respondent(s) PRAYER To enlarge the Petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of the Petitioner's arrest by the respondent police in Crime No. 34 of 2025 on the file of Respondent police on such terms and conditions as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper and thus render Justice.

For Petitioner(s):

Mr. S. Arivazhagan For Respondent(s):

Mr. S. Santhosh, Government Advocate

ORDER

The petitioner /A2, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 3(2)a, 4(1), 5(1)a, 6(1) and 7(1)a of Immoral Traffic Prevention Act in Crime No.34 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that, the petitioner is a license holder of the SPA; that on inspection, the respondent police found that the petitioner indulged in immoral trafficking and 9 victims were rescued. Hence, the case.

3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the allegations are false; and that in any case, custodial interrogation is not required and sought for anticipatory bail for the petitioner.

4. Learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent police, while opposing the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, reiterated the prosecution case and on instructions submitted that 9 victims were rescued. He further submitted that the petitioner has no previous case.

5. Considering the nature of allegations, the fact that the petitioner has no bad antecedents and since the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not required for the purpose of investigation, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

6. Accordingly, the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on her appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, before the learned IV Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai District, on condition that the petitioner shall execute bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the

police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the said Magistrate, on further condition that:

[a] the petitioner and the sureties shall affix their photographs and Left Thumb Impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity.

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at 10.30 a.m., until further orders.

[c] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial. [d] the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial.

[e] On breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioner in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioner released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji vs. State of Kerala [(2005)AIR SCW 5560].

[f] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of B.N.S. 10-03-2025 AT Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes To 1.State Represented By Its Inspector Of Police, Kilpauk Police Station, Chennai District.

(Crime No.34 of 2025)

SUNDER MOHAN, J.

AT CRL OP No. 6700 of 10-03-2025