IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA TUESDAY, THE 26TH AUGUST 2008 / 4TH BHADRA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 5117 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRMP.1910/2008 of DISTRICT COURT, KOTTAYAM CRIME NO.13/08 OF EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, KOTTAYAM PETITIONER --------------------------- RAJESH, S/O.RAJAPPAN MANALADICHIRAYIL HOUSE, THIRUVARPPU.P.O. THIRUVARPPU VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM BY ADV. SRI.BABU KARUKAPADATH SMT.M.A.VAHEEDA BABU RESPONDENTS: ------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY EXCISE INSPECTOR, EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, KOTTAYAM THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ----------------------------------------- B.A.No. 5117 of 2008 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th August, 2008 O R D E R This petition is for bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 8(1) & (2), 55(g), 55(b), 12(1) and 58 of the Abkari Act. According to prosecution, petitioner is the second accused in the crime. He was engaged in manufacturing of liquor along with two others. He could not be arrested from the spot. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the petitioner is “Rajesh, S/o.Rajappan, Manaladichirayil House”. But, as per the details in the prosecution records, one “Rajesh, S/o.Rajappan, Vengalikattuveettil” is the third accused. Petitioner is not the said person and hence, anticipatory bail may be granted, it is submitted. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the case diary reveals that both the details relate to the same person and the petitioner is the third accused. The incident occurred on 28.4.2008 and the petitioner could not be arrested so far. 5. On hearing both sides, it appears that the petitioner's contention is that he is not the third accused, who is required by the police in connection with the crime. According to him, his BA.5117/08 2 address is different. But, except oral assertions made, nothing is produced to show that he is not the person shown as the accused. In the light of the submissions made by learned Public Prosecutor and in the absence of any materials produced at this stage to show that the petitioner is not the person wanted for arrest in this case, there is no ground to grant anticipatory bail. Petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE vgs.