Dinesh v. The State Represented By
Crl. O.P. No.21538 / of 2024 P. DHANABAL.J., The petitioner / Accused No.2 who apprehends arrest in the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 3(2)(a), 4(1) and 5(1)(a) of Immoral Traffic (Preservation) Act in connection with the Cr. No.335 of 2024, seeks anticipatory bail.
2. The case of the prosecution is that based on the secret information, on 10.07.2024 at about 1.30 p.m., when the respondent police inspected an house belonging to one Manjunath at Kamanthotti, Bharathipuram, it came to know that one Sabin had indulged many women in prostitution business and further it came to know that the said Manjunath has given the house to her for rent and this petitioner has acted as middlemen. Hence the case.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is only a house broker and has not committed any offence as alleged by the respondent police, that he is an innocent, that this petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case and hence he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) appearing for the respondent police would contend that the petitioner is A2, that A1 has
indulged many women into the prostitution in a house at Kamanthotti, Bharathipuram and this petitioner has acted as middlemen and hence he objected to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Further he submitted that A1 was already arrested and released on bail and no previous case is pending against the petitioner.
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
6. Considering the arguments putforth on either side, considering the nature of offence charged against the petitioner and he is a house broker, considering the fact that no previous case is pending against the petitioner and that A1 was already released on bail, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to the following conditions:
7. Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on his appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the learned District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate No.I, Hosur on condition that the petitioner shall execute a 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 learned Magistrate concerned and on further condition that: [a] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police on everyday at 10.00 a.m. for a period of 30 days and thereafter as and when required for interrogation.
[b] the petitioner shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;
[c] the petitioner shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court;
[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 B.N.S.2023.
09.09.2024 mjs To 1.The District Munsif-cum-Judicial Magistrate No.I, Hosur 2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.
3.The Inspector of Police, Shoolagiri Police Station, Krishnagiri District. P.DHANABAL,J mjs CRL O.P. No.21538 of 2024
09.09.2024