Jaffer Ali v. The State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 12-03-2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Jaffer Ali S/o. Mohammed,No.183, C-Block,Metha Complex, Little Mount,Chennai- 600 015 ..Petitioner(s) Vs The State Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Anti Vice Squad 2, Chennai, Chennai District.

(Crime No. 1 of 2026) ..Respondent(s) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, Act, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of their arrest in crime No. 1 of 2026 on the file of the Inspector of police, Anti- Vice Squad-2, Chennai, Chennai District and thus render justice. For Petitioner(s):

Mr.Sundararajan P For Respondent(s):

Mr.P.Dhileepan Government Advocate (Crl. side)

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Section 3(2) (a), 4(1), 5(1) (a) of the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 in Crime No.1 of 2026, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 21.01.2026, the defacto complainant received a secret information over phone that A1 in this case contacted him and offering sexual services with women from other states and provided the address. Based on the said information, the police officials along with raid party went to the scene of occurrence at about 10.30 a.m. and identified A1 and A2, arrested them and rescued the victim. The petitioner herein/A3 is the owner of the property where A1 and A2 committed the offences. Hence the case.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. Hence, he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that the petitioner is involved in immoral traffic offence. He further submitted that there is no previous case against the petitioner and hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

6. Considering the nature of allegation against the petitioner, this Court is of the view that it is not desirable to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original petition is dismissed. 12-03-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order MTL To

1. The State Rep. by the Inspector of Police, Anti Vice Squad 2, Chennai, Chennai District.

(Crime No. 1 of 2026)

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

C.KUMARAPPAN, J.

MTL 12-03-2026