B Sathesh v. The State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 16.09.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Crl.O.P.No.25337 of 2025 B.Sathesh ... Petitioner Vs.

State Rep by The Inspector of Police, D2,Medavakkam Police Station Chennai District.

... Respondent (Cr.No.122 of 2025) PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Cr.No.122 of 2025 on the file of the The Inspector of Police,D2,Medavakkam Police Station, Chennai District. For Petitioners : Mr. Edwin Jeyakumar For Respondent : Mr.S.Udayakumar Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

O R D E R

The petitioner, who apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 3(2)(a), 4(1), 5(1)(a) of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956 in Crime No. 122 of 2025, on the file of the respondent Police, seeks anticipatory bail. 1/6

2. The allegation against this petitioner is that the petitioner/A1 along with other accused were running brothel house in the name of spa by engaging girls. Hence, the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is an innocent person and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He also submits that the petitioner is ready to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court and ready to furnish sufficient solvent sureties for his release. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) for the respondent police, reiterated the prosecution case and submits that totally there are three accused in this case and this petitioner is arrayed as A1. He submits that the respondent police had rescued eight victim girls out of which one victim girl sent to home and the statement has also been recorded from the victim girls. He submits that the petitioner is not only the owner of the place but also actively participated in procuring customers for the purpose of immoral activities. He also submits that no previous case is pending against this petitioner. However, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

2/6

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of allegations, submissions made by learned counsels on either side, considering the gravity of the offence committed by the petitioner, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed. 16.09.2025 nr To 1.The Judicial Magistrate-I, Tambaram.

2. The Inspector of Police, D2,Medavakkam Police Station Chennai District.

3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

3/6

K.RAJASEKAR , J.

nr Crl.O.P.No.25337 of 2025 16.09.2025 4/6