Vinayagamoorthy v. The State Represented By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 04-11-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

1. Vinayagamoorthy S/o. saminathan, No.3/150, west street, Amur, Viluppuram Petitioner(s) Vs

1. The State represented by The Inspector of Police, W27, All Women Police Station, Vadapalani, Chennai - 600 026.S/o. saminathan, No.3/150, west street, Amur, Viluppuram Respondent(s) PRAYER To Grant Anticipatory Bail to the Petitioner in the event of arrest in connection with any complaint or case that may be registered as Crime No.Unknown of 2025 on the file of the W-27, All Women Police Station, Vadapalani, Chennai - 600 026. and pass such further or other orders as this Honble Court. For Petitioner N.Gnanapranavan For Respondent(s):

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

ORDER

The petitioner, who apprehend arrest at the hands of the respondent police for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 69 and 75(2) (Exploitation under false pretext) of the BNS, 2023 in Crime No. not known of 2025, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner developed a relationship with the victim girl aged about 19 years and promised to marry her. After that he had set up a house at Nesapakkam and they lived together for some time and she became pregnant and subsequently, the petitioner started avoiding her and refused to marry her. Hence complaint was lodged.

3. Learner council for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was not having any relationship at all with the victim girl. He further submitted that a false complaint has been lodged and prayed to grant anticipatory bail.

4. Learner Government Advocate (crl.side) appearing for the respondent police reported that the petitioner closely moved with the victim girl aged about 19 years and promised to marry her, had a sexual relationship and subsequently, she became pregnant and the petitioner started avoiding her. Now the girl also

delivered a baby. Investigation in this case is pending. Hence, he opposed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

5. Considering the nature of the allegation and the fact that the investigation is pending, and also considering the age of the victim and the petitioner, I am of the view that if anticipated bail is granted, it would hamper the investigation. I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is dismissed. 04-11-2025 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes To 1.The State represented by The Inspector of Police, W27, All Women Police Station, Vadapalani, Chennai - 600 026.S/o. saminathan, No.3/150, west street, Amur, Viluppuram 2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras.

K.RAJASEKAR J.

mpa CRL OP No. 29979 of 04-11-2025