Allowed

C.Unnikrishnan v. State by

Madras HC20 Nov 2024CRL OP/28989/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Single Bench granted anticipatory bail to a petitioner charged with offences under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956, subject to conditions including reporting daily, executing a bond, and not tampering with evidence or witnesses.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on bail by order in anticipation of arrest, subject to specific conditions of reporting and bonum conduct.

C.Unnikrishnan Vs State by — Anticipatory Bail | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

Crl.O.P.No.28989 of 2024

¶2

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

¶3

The petitioner/A4, 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.222 of 2024, on the file of the respondent police, seeks anticipatory bail.

¶4

2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner had conducted

¶5

immoral trafficking activities by using 13 victims. Hence, the case.

¶6

3 . The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the

¶7

petitioner is innocent and he has been falsely implicated in this case. He would further submit that no previous case is pending against the petitioner. He would further submit that the petitioner is ready to abide by any condition that may be imposed by this Court. Hence, he prays for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.

¶8

4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side), while opposing the grant of anticipatory bail, would submit that the petitioner conducted immoral trafficking activities by using 13 victims. He would further submit

¶9

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶10

1/4

¶11

that the victim girls were secured by the respondent police. He would further submit that there is no previous case is pending against the petitioner.

¶12

5.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) for the respondent and perused the materials available on record.

¶13

6.Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the submissions made by the learned counsel on either side and also taking into consideration the fact that there is no previous case pending against the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

¶14

[a] Accordingly, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail in the event of arrest or on her appearance, within a period of fifteen days from the date on which the order copy made ready, before the IV Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet , on condition that the petitioner shall execute a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties for a like sum to the satisfaction of the respondent police or the police officer who intends to arrest or to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate concerned, failing which, the petition for anticipatory bail shall stand dismissed and on further condition that:

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

2/4

¶17

[b] the petitioner shall report before the respondent police daily at

¶18

6:30 p.m., until further orders.

¶19

[c] the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

¶20

[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];

¶21

[ f ] If the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 269 of BNS.

¶22

20.11.2024

¶23

ata

¶24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶25

3/4

¶26

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.

¶27

ata

¶28

Crl.O.P.No.28989 of 2024

¶29

20.11.2024

¶30

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶31

4/4

C.Unnikrishnan v. State by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.Unnikrishnan v. State by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Selvi, Vs State rep. by

Vijayraj Surana Vs Assistant Director

M Krishnamurthi Vs the State Rep by Its

R. Chandrasekaran Vs State Rep.by

Vasarayappa Vs State Rep.by

B.Balamurugan Vs the State Rep. by Its