IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA TUESDAY, THE 24TH JUNE 2008 / 3RD ASHADHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 4036 of 2008() ----------------------------- (CRIME NO. 89/2008 OF VADAKKEKKAD POLICE STATION) PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.8: ----------------- SATHYAN , AGED 45 YEARS, S/O. VASU PONNARASSERRY HOUSE, P.O.AKKIKKAVU, PERUMVILAVU VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV RESPONDENTS: ------------- STATE OF KERALA REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM CRIME NO, 89 OF 08 OF VADAKKEKKAD POLICE STATION) BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. M.S..BREEZ. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. ------------------------------------------ Bail Appl.No. 4036 of 2008 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 24th day of June, 2008. ORDER Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 55(a) (i) and 57 (a) of the Abkari Act. On the allegation that spirit was being mixed in toddy and sold from the toddy shop of 7th accused, the police party went to the shop and detected the crime and arrested A1 to A6 from the spot. The contraband articles were seized. The 7th accused is the licensee of the shop. The petitioner is the 8th accused, who is the owner of the building, who is alleged to have supplied spirit for the commission of offence. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, though the petitioner is the owner of the building, he has absolutely nothing to do with the possession of the building. It had been let out on rental basis to the 7th accused. A document was also executed and it is Annexure-1. The petitioner is only a lessor and he is not in possession of the building or the articles therein. The petitioner is implicated in the case only because he happened to be the owner of the building. Referring to the remand report, it is pointed out that in the remand report, there were only vague allegations against the petitioner that the petitioner is the owner of the building and that he [B.A.4036/08] 2 had “instructed” the accused to commit the offence etc. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that it is only after petitioner filed this petition contending that the only role of the petitioner is as the owner of the building, subsequent allegations have been made regarding supply of spirit etc., based on alleged confession statement. 4. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. Hence, the following order is passed: i) Petitioner shall surrender before the investigating officer within 7 days from today and make himself available for interrogation. ii) In the event of arrest, if any, petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting officer on condition that he will report before the investigating officer as and when directed and cooperate with the investigation. This petition is allowed. K. HEMA, JUDGE. Krs.