IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 26TH MAY 2008 / 5TH JYAISHTA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 3301 of 2008() ------------------------------------ CRIME NO.110/2008 OF CHEVAYUR POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE PETITIONER/ACCUSED ----------------------------------- M.RAJAN, AGED 46 YEARS, S/O.MOOCHORAN, MANADHA HOUSE, KANNANKARA AMSOM, ECAHNOOR DESOM, CHELANNOOR, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SMT.T.KAMALA MENON RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ 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.C.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/05/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ----------------------------------------- B.A.NO.3301 of 2008 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of May, 2008 O R D E R The alleged offences are under Sections 451, 511 and 377 of the Indian Penal Code. According to prosecution, petitioner is an employee of the Corporation and he attempted to have unnatural sex with the defacto complainant, who is a boy aged 14 years, on 5.4.2008 at about 10 AM, by trespassing into the house of the victim, when he was alone in the house. 2. This petition is opposed. An earlier anticipatory bail application filed by the petitioner was dismissed. Thereupon, the petitioner surrendered before the Magistrate's Court on 8.5.2008 and he is in remand since then. According to learned counsel for petitioner, the act of penetration has not been taken place and hence offence under Section 377 IPC is not attracted. She has also cited Emporror v. Sain Das (AIR 1926 Lahore 375) in support of her contentions. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor admitted that there was no penetration as per the prosecution case, but there was only an allegation of attempt and the male organ was allegedly pressed BA.3301/08 2 against the boy, in an attempt to commit the offence. In such circumstances, the offence under Section 377 IPC was not completed and there was only an attempt to commit the offence. It is also alleged that the petitioner has trespassed into the house of the victim to commit the offence. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor also submitted that the investigation is at a preliminary stage and in case the petitioner is released on bail at this stage, it will adversely affect the investigation, since the petitioner is likely to tamper with evidence and influence the witnesses. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that it is not a fit case to grant bail at this stage. The Petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE vgs.