Raghul v. Inspector Of Police

Crl.O.P.No.16543 of 2023 G.CHANDRASEKHARAN.J., The petitioners namely Raghul and Harsha Chechi @ Ajitha, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offence under Sections 3(1), 3(2)(a), 4(2)(c) of ITP Act in Crime No.129 of 2023 on the file of the respondent seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that, petitioners are innocent persons and they have been falsely implicated in this case. Apprehending arrest, this petition is filed

3. In response, learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submitted that, petitioners are owners of Rivana SPA. The SPA Centre is used for prostitution. 1st accused is the owner and he was arrested and still in jail. Investigation in this case is not completed. Thus, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners. 1/3

4. Considered the rival submissions and perused the records. It is seen from the FIR allegations that, petitioners are the persons who engaged the victims for prostitution in the SPA. Investigation is not completed. Thus, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners.

5. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 28.07.2023 Sma 2/3

G.CHANDRASEKHARAN. J.

Sma Crl.O.P.No.16543 of 2023 28.07.2023 3/3