IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 28TH JULY 2011 / 6TH SRAVANA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 5998 of 2011() ----------------------------- CRIME No.111 OF 2011 OF N.PARAVUR POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.68 :- -------------------------------------------- K.S.SAKTHIVEL, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O. CHELLAPPA GOUNDER, NO.66, KARTHIKEYAN ILLAM, MAHAR THEVAR STREET, THIRUMANGALAM, MADHURAI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS VARGHESE.K RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT :- ------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.V.MANU THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: jvt K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------- B.A. No.5998 OF 2011 --------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of July, 2011 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Petitioner is accused No.68 in Crime No.111 of 2011 of the North Paravur Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 366-A, 354, 372, 373, 376(2)(g), 506(i) and 202 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 23 of the Juvenile Justice(Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000 3. The prosecution case is that the victim girl aged below 16 years was procured by several persons including the petitioner and she was taken to various places in and around Ernakulam City and other places in Kerala and even outside the State. It is alleged that one Manikandan Swami B.A. No.5998 OF 2011 2 procured the girl . The girl was kept in his house for two nights and a day. It is alleged that Manikandan Swami had sex with her on eleven times. It is also alleged that a police officer had also visited the house of Manikandan Swami and he had forceful sex with the girl. That police officer, according to the prosecution, is accused No.68. He is a police officer of Tamil Nadu police. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that only after identifying the petitioner, he can be arrested. This contention is unsustainable. The offence alleged is grave in nature. More than 100 persons are involved in the offence. In a case of this nature, I do not think that anticipatory bail can be granted, the remedy being a discretionary remedy. The discretion of the court cannot be exercised in favour of a person against whom such a heinous offence is alleged. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Application is dismissed. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE. cms