Maneesh @ Manishkumar v. State Rep. By Inspector Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 17-11-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR Maneesh @ Manishkumar Petitioner(s) Vs State rep. by Inspector of Police, Tiruppur North Police Station, Tiruppur, Tirupur District. Crime No. 1118 of 2025.

Respondent(s) PRAYER To enlarge the petitioner on Anticipatory Bail in the event of his arrest pending investigation in Crime No. 1118 of 2025 on the file of the respondent.

For Petitioner(s):

C S Saravanan C S For Respondent(s):

Mr.S.Udayakumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

The petitioner apprehends arrest for the alleged offence under Sections 3(1), 3(2)(A), 3(2)(B), 6(1)(B) of ITP Act in Crime No.1118 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police seeks anticipatory bail.

2. This is the second anticipatory bail application. The allegation against the petitioner is that he joined hands with two other accused and they are running the brothel house by taking a house for rent. Subsequently the police party able to find out the modus and the accused were arrested and it was revealed that this petitioner attracts the customers through one mobile app and by using the app, they were involved in the case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is only serving under A1 who was arrested and only on instructions, he go and bring the customers and drop them back and he was not aware about the illegalities committed by A1. Therefore, he prays to grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the

respondent police, reported that totally there are 3 accused in this case and after arresting A1, two victims were also rescued and victims have also clearly implicated this petitioner. Hence, he opposed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. I have also gone through the statement and it revealed that all the 3 accused for the purpose of earning huge income, established the brothel house by using two victims. I am of the view that if granting anticipatory bail is granted, it would further encourage them to involve similar offence. Hence, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner and there is no change in circumstances of the case, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed.

6. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 17-11-2025 gbi

To 1.State rep. by Inspector of Police, Tiruppur North Police Station, Tiruppur, Tirupur District. Crime No.

1118 of 2025.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

K.RAJASEKAR J.

gbi CRL OP No. 31200 of 17-11-2025