IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 18TH JANUARY 2008 / 28TH POUSHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 299 of 2008() ---------------------------- C.R.NO.57/07 OF RANNY EXCISE RANGE : PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.1 ---------------------------------------- SANOSH, S/O SADANANDAN, MUNGAM KAVUNGAL HOUSE, EZHUMATTOOR KARA, EZHUMATTOOR VILLAGE, MULLAPPALLY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.A.C.DEVY RESPONDENTS: ------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.GIKKU JACOB THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ B.A.No.299 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of January, 2008 ORDER Application for anticipatory bail. Petitioner faces allegations in a crime registered under the Kerala Abkari Act. The petitioner's mother was the former licencee in respect of a toddy shop. The same was not working. The allegation is that the petitioner was carrying on sale of illicit liquor near the said toddy shop. On receipt of information when the excise party reached the scene of the crime, they allegedly saw a person engaged in the activity of illicit sale of liquor. That person along with persons who were his customers took to his heels. They could not be apprehended. Enquiry revealed the name, details and identity of the miscreant. Seizure was effected as per a mahazer. 3.5 litres of arrack was seized. Investigation is in progress. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegations are false and the petitioner was not present at all at the scene of the crime. Anticipatory bail may be granted to the petitioner, it is prayed. B.A.No.299 of 2008 2 3. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application. Available indications point to the complicity of the petitioner, it is pointed out. The name of the petitioner is clearly mentioned in the contemporaneous seizure mahazer and the occurrence report. There is no reason at all to doubt or suspect the allegations raised against the petitioner now. The petitioner may be directed to surrender before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail. There are no circumstances justifying the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, submits the learned Public Prosecutor . 4. Having considered all the relevant inputs, I am not persuaded to agree that there are any features in this case which can justify or warrant the invocation of the extraordinary equitable discretion under Section 438 Cr.P.C. This, I agree with the learned Public Prosecutor, is a fit case where the petitioner must appear before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail. The fact that the present licencee of the toddy shop has subsequently been arrayed as the 2nd accused doe not also, according to me, justify the prayer for anticipatory bail of the petitioner. B.A.No.299 of 2008 3 5. This application is, in these circumstances, dismissed, but I may hasten to observe that if the petitioner surrenders before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate and applies for bail after giving sufficient prior notice to the Prosecutor in charge of the case, the learned Magistrate must proceed to pass appropriate orders on merits and expeditiously. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-