Anticipatory bail sought by the Manager of a massage centre raided by police under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act; earlier bail petition dismissed and no change in circumstances, with the owner absconding. Anticipatory bail declined.
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.4833 of 2024
Crl.O.P.No.4833 of 2024
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.
The petitioner 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.16 of 2024, seeks anticipatory bail.
2.It is stated that the respondent had conducted a raid at Ayurvedic Foot Recharge Centre, Mylapore and six victim women had been rescued. The petitioner is the Manager of the place. It is also stated that A3 had been arrested and granted bail. A1 is the owner of the place is still absconding.
3.The earlier petition seeking anticipatory bail was dismissed
on 13.02.2024 in Crl.O.P.No.2982 of 2024. There is no change in circumstance, still A1 is absconding.
1/2
Crl.O.P.No.4833 of 2024
C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.
smv
4.In view of that particular fact, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands dismissed.
05.04.2024
smv
Crl.O.P.No.4833 of 2024
2/2
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner, Manager of premises raided under the Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act.
3 provisions across 1 enactments
Petitioner
Respondent Police
C.V.Karthikeyan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
