Nirupan Vijay v. State Rep. By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 14.07.2025

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN Nirupan Vijay ... Petitioner

Versus

State rep. by The Inspector of Police, Sathuvachari Police Station, Vellore District.

(Crime No.155 of 2025) ... Respondent PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.155 of 2025, pending investigation on the file of the respondent. For Petitioner : M/s.R.Thulasi For Respondent : Mr.Leonard Arul Joseph Selvam Government Advocate (Crl. Side) *****

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable u/s 3(1), 4(1), 5(1)(a) of Immoral Traffic Prevention Act, in Crime No.155 of 2025, seeks anticipatory bail.

Page No.1 of 4

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 22.06.2025 when the respondent police received secrete information that some of the male persons ingress and egress from the house situated at Vivekananthar Street, Vallalar, Sathuvachari. On suspicious, the respondent police went there and made search from the house and caught red handed one male by name Deva and one female by name Akshara Banu, on enquiry from her, she revealed that she is the native of Bangalore, due to her family situation she is doing prostitution with A1 by name Ramu and he was arrested and recorded his statement and he confessed that this petition is taken out the said house for lease and running prostitution and directed him to arrange the facilities to the customers. After recording his statement, case was registered against him and the petitioner herein.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an innocent person and has been falsely implicated in this case. He further submitted that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. Further, he submitted that the petitioner is ready and willing to abide by any stringent conditions as imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Page No.2 of 4

4. Learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police reiterated the prosecution case and submitted that the petitioner is having one previous case similar in nature. Hence, he vehemently opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard the learned counsels on either side and perused the records.

6. Since the petitioner has committed very serious offence against the society and is having one previous case, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is very much required. Hence, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

7. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 14.07.2025 sp To 1.The Inspector of Police, Sathuvachari Police Station, Vellore District. 2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

Page No.3 of 4

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

sp 14.07.2025 Page No.4 of 4