IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 24TH OCTOBER 2011 / 2ND KARTHIKA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 8427 of 2011() ----------------------------- C.R.NO.56/2011 OF CHENGANNUR EXCISE RANGE PETITIONER (S): -------------------- MOHANAN, S/O. KRISHNAN, KATTUPARAMPIL KIZHAKKETHIL HOUSE, ULUNTHI MURI, ENNAKKATTU VILLAGE, CHENGANNUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.ANIL D.KARTHA SRI.V.AJITH KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE EXCISE INSPECTOR, EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, CHENGANNUR. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.K.RAJEEV THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A.No.8427 of 2011 --------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of October, 2011 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the accused in C.R.No.56 of 2011 of Chengannur Excise Range. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section 55(a) of the Abkari Act. 3. The prosecution case is that on 3.9.2011, the accused was found in possession of 8 litres of arrack. 4. The petitioner apprehends arrest in the case. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the materials on record do not indicate that the petitioner was involved in the offence. 5. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the BA 8427/11 2 petitioner could not be arrested on 3.9.2011 as he ran way. It is submitted that the petitioner was found to be in possession of the arrack. 6. The allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not think that the petitioner is entitled to get the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The matter requires investigation. Custodial interrogation of the petitioner may be required in the case. If anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, it would adversely affect the proper and smooth investigation of the case. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail application is dismissed. K.T.SANKARAN JUDGE csl