A single judge considered a petition for anticipatory bail filed by the Managing Director of a hotel accused of harboring a brothel in a leased portion. The court refused bail noting the necessity of investigation.
Anticipatory bail to the petitioner was not granted, and the criminal original petition stands dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Crl.O.P.No.23830 of 2023
Crl.O.P.No.23830 of 2023 C.V.KARTHIKEYAN , J.
The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in Crime No.569 of 2023, registered by the respondent under Section 3(2)(a), 4(2)(a), 5(1)(a) and 7(1)(a) of Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956.
2.The learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner is a Managing Director of Hotel Windsor Castle, in which according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, very important persons have stayed there for more than 10 times. It is stated that the petitioner is also a former President of the Rotary Club at Salem and various other social organizations. But, however, the petitioner appears to have leased out a portion of the hotel to run a SPA which was called “Pear View Ayurvedi Medic SPA' (Medi SPA). It is stated that the defacto complainant was solicited to come over to the said place where he found about four victim girls and later gave a complaint and the victim girls have been subsequently rescued. The learned counsel states that as Managing Director he never knew about the activities in the said SPA. It is stated that it was only the Manager and the other
1/2
Crl.O.P.No.23830 of 2023
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.
kp
person incharge, who are responsible. As Managing Director of the said hotel the petitioner should be aware of every activity which goes on and he should be responsible for all such activities. He has also been receiving monthly rent and that rent is a part of consideration for running of the SPA.
3.In view of the fact that investigation will have to be done in this particular issue, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this criminal original petition stands dismissed.
13.10.2023
kp
Crl.O.P.No.23830 of 2023
2 issues framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner who manages a hotel leasing a portion for a SPA implicated in running a brothel.
Whether the petitioner, as landlord, can claim ignorance of unlawful activities conducted in the leased portion of his property.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
C.V. Karthikeyan
State of Tamil Nadu
C.V. Karthikeyan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
