IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 8TH JANUARY 2010 / 18TH POUSHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 18 of 2010 C.R.NO.150 OF 2009 OF NOORANADU EXCISE RANGE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 ------------------------------------------- RAJEEV, AGED 28 YEARS, S/O.RAGHAVAN, KANISSERIL VEEDU, VALLIKKUNNAM MURI, VALLIKKUNNAM VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.C.C.THOMAS, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.NIREESH MATHEW RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY EXCISE INSPECTOR, EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, NOORANADU, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AMJAD ALI THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NO. 18 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 8th day of January, 2010 O R D E R This is an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the first accused in C.R. No.150 of 2009 of Nooranadu Excise Range, Alappuzha District. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner and the other accused are under Sections 55(a), 56(b) and 57(a) of the Abkari Act. 3. The prosecution case is that on 25.12.2009, the Excise Officials inspected Toddy Shop No.14 of Nooranadu Excise Range. They found the first accused mixing some liquid with toddy. Samples of toddy were taken and the officials seized 385 litres of toddy kept in the toddy shop. The petitioner was arrested on 25.12.2009 and he was remanded to judicial custody. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that registration of the crime and arrest of the petitioner before getting a B.A. NO. 18 OF 2010 :: 2 :: report from the Chemical Examiner was premature. He relied on Rule 8(3) of the Abkari Shops (Disposal) Rules, 2002. The counsel points out that if ultimately it is found that the sample of toddy is free from any noxious substance, there would be no justification for the detention of the petitioner in judicial custody. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that if, on getting the report, it is found that the toddy was adulterated, still the investigating officer can seek for appropriate remedies for re-arrest of the petitioner. 5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the contentions put forward by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the fact that the report of the Chemical Examiner is not received, I am of the view that the petitioner is to be released on bail. 6. The petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class – II, Mavelikkara, subject to the following conditions: a) The petitioner shall report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M. and 11 A.M. on all Mondays, till the final report is filed or until further orders; B.A. NO. 18 OF 2010 :: 3 :: 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 as above. It is made clear that after receipt of the report of the Chemical Examiner, the investigating officer would be free to seek for appropriate reliefs, in the manner indicated above. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/