Wesley @ Ranjith v. State Rep. By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated : 30.12.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL Wesley @ Ranjith ... Petitioner Vs The State Rep. by The Inspector of Police Anti-Vice Squad-1 Chennai District Crime No.34 of 2025 ... Respondent PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of B.N.S.S., to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest in Crime No.34 of 2025 pending investigation on the file of the respondent. For Petitioner : Mr.Narayana Prasadh For Respondent : Mr.S.Udaya Kumar Government Advocate (Crl.Side) 1/6

ORDER

The petitioner who apprehends arrest in the hands of the respondent police for the offences punishable under Sections 4(1) and 5(1)(a) of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956, in connection with Crime No.34 of 2025, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other accused had involved in immoral trafficking and during raid, the respondent police had secured four victims. Hence, this case.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that the co-accused has been released on bail. Hence, he prayed to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

4. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondent reiterated the prosecution case and opposed for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner by stating that there are four previous cases pending against the petitioner. However, he would submit that the co-accused has been released on bail.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. 2/6

6. Considering the nature of the offence and though the petitioner has got some previous cases against him, he has been granted bail in those cases and also considering the fact that the co-accused has been 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 IV-Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai, 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 Inspector of Police, Mahabalipuram Police Station, daily at 10.30 a.m. until further orders. [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 him 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;

3/6

[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 abscond, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 B.N.S.2023.

30.12.2025 ksa-2/cgi 4/6

To

1. The IV-Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet, Chennai

2. The Inspector of Police Anti-Vice Squad-1 Chennai District

3. The Public Prosecutor High Court of Madras 5/6

P.DHANABAL, J., ksa-2 06.

30.12.2025 6/6