Md. Sikkandar v. State Rep By

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN , J.

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent Police for the offences under Sections 392 & 506(2) IPC and Sections 3(2)(a), 4(2)(a), 4(2)(c) and 5(1)(d) of the Immoral Trafficking (Prevention Act), 1956 in Crime No.289 of 2023 seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated for the offences under Sections 392 & 506(2) IPC and Sections 3(2)(a), 4(2)(a), 4(2)(c) and 5(1)(d) of the Immoral Trafficking (Prevention Act), 1956 in Crime No.289 of 2023. Thus, he seeks anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

3. It is stated by the learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) that the defacto complainant was approached by A1 to A4 and taken to "Hotel Snow Drop" and thereafter, the accused demanded Rs.6000/- from her. When she refused, they showed a knife and threatened the defacto complainant and robbed Rs.3000/- from her.

1/3

4. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner/A6 and A5 are running the said hotel. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the petitioner is no way connected with the said hotel and he is running an independent hotel named "Grand Castel". It is stated that this particular hotel named "Hotel Snow Drop" is owned by A5. But however, the specific contention of the respondent is that, both the petitioner herein and A5 are running a hotel and the name of this petitioner is also found in the first information report. Enquiry will have to be necessarily conducted to find out the purpose of which the hotel is bring run and purpose for which the rooms are being used.

4. Inview of the particular facts, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

17.10.2023 gd C.V.KARTHIKEYAN , J.

2/3

gd 17.10.2023 3/3