IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 18TH BHADRA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 5031 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.143/2009 OF KARUNAGAPPALLY EXCISE RANGE PETITIONER/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- RADHAKRISHNAN, S/O.SADANANDAN, AGED 40 YEARS, RESIDING AT 152, KRISHNA VILASAM, 4 ADINADU NORTH B., KULASEKHARAPURAM VILLAGE, KARUNAGAPPALLY TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.A.T.ANILKUMAR SRI.P.DALBI EMMANUEL RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, REP. BY THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR, KARUNAGAPPALLY EXCISE RANGE IN CR.143/2009. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.5031 of 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of September, 2009 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.143 of 2009 of Karunagappally Excise Range. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section 55(i) of the Abkari Act. 3. The prosecution case is that on 12.8.2009, at 6.45 P.M., the petitioner was found engaged in the sale of Indian made foreign liquor. On seeing the Excise Party, the petitioner ran away. A quantity of 750 ml. of Indian made Foreign Liquor, a mobile phone and Rs.440/- were seized. According to the petitioner, the mobile phone does not belong to him. He is not involved in the offence. The Excise Party had foisted a case against him. 4. I have perused the case diary. 5. There is nothing to indicate that any investigation was conducted to find out whether the mobile phone belongs to the petitioner. Except the mahazar, there is no material to come to a BA No.5031/2009 2 prima facie conclusion that the petitioner is involved in the offence. It is not proper to arrive at any finding on the merits of the case at this stage. At the same time, I am of the view that in the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is entitled to get an order for anticipatory bail. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioner, the officer in charge of the police station shall release him on bail on his executing bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: a) The petitioner shall report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M. and 11 A.M. on alternate Mondays, till the final report is filed or until further orders; b) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; c) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence; d) The petitioner shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail; e) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled. The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated above. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE BA No.5031/2009 3 csl