IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 2ND MAY 2008 / 12TH VAISAKHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 2518 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO. 110/08 OF CHEVAYOOR POLICE STATION PETITIONER --------------------------- M.RAJAN, AGED 46 YEARS,S/O.MOOCHORAN MANADHA HOUSE, KANNANKARA AMSOM, ECAHNOOR DESOM CHELANNOOR, KOZHIKODE BY ADV. SMT.T.KAMALA MENON RESPONDENTS: ------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTING SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHEVAYUR POLICE STATION KOZHIKODE,THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U. NAZAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 2518 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 2nd day of May, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner, an employee of the Corporation, charged with the responsibility of spraying pesticide, faces allegations in a crime registered, inter alia, under Sections 451 and 377 r/w. 511 I.P.C. The petitioner allegedly gained access to the house of the victim, a 14 years old boy, and attempted to have sexual intercourse against the order of nature with him. He made a hue and cry. People collected. Allegations were raised before the police. Crime has been registered. Investigating is in progress. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a respectable person and he has been falsely implicated by some one, who is ill-disposed to him. False allegations are raised, it is submitted. 2. The learned Prosecutor opposes the application. There is no specific allegation even raised that the victim is making false allegations against the petitioner. The nature and gravity of B.A.No. 2518 of 2008 2 the allegations as also the broad circumstances of the case must persuade this Court not to invoke the jurisdiction under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioner, submits the learned Prosecutor. 3. I find merit in the opposition by the learned Prosecutor. I am unable to perceive any features in this case, which would justify the invocation of the extra ordinary equitable discretion under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioner. This I am satisfied is a fit case where the petitioner must resort to the ordinary and normal procedure of appearing before the Investigator or the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail in the usual course. 4. This application is accordingly dismissed. I may however hasten to observe that if the petitioner appears before the learned Magistrate and applies for bail after giving sufficient prior notice to the Prosecutor in charge of the case, the learned Magistrate must proceed to pass orders on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. (R. BASANT) Judge tm