IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 19TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 30TH MAGHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 697 of 2009() ---------------------------- CRMP.228/2009 of D.C.& SESSIONS COURT,THODUPUZHA CRIME NO.6/09 OF CHUMKUMMETTU POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ 2ND ACUD ---------------------------------------- KURIAN @ JOY, S/O.VARKEY,AGED 52, PALLIKUNNEL HOUSE, KUMBUMMETU KARA,KARRUNAPURAM VILLAGE,UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KUMBUMMETTU POLICE STATION. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ----------------------------------------- B.A.No. 697 of 2009 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th February, 2009 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offence is under Section 8(2) of the Abkari Act. According to prosecution, on 8.1.2009 at 1 am, police got an information regarding transportation of illicit arrack and the Sub Inspector of Police and party waited and at 2 am, accused 1 to 3 were found proceeding with a can. On seeing the police, accused 1 and 2 ran away and third accused was arrested from the spot. 10 litres of distilled arrack, which was abandoned by first accused, was seized. Petitioner is first accused. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner is absolutely innocent of the allegations made. The Sub Inspector of Police has grudge against petitioner due to a complaint lodged by him against him on 26.6.2008 before the DGP, a copy of which is Annexure A1. The Sub Inspector is a close relative of a local leader of a political party and on 19.6.2008, he came to the house of petitioner and took a photograph of petitioner exhibiting a slate on which it was BA.697/09 2 written that he is an abkari offender etc. and he demanded Rs.10,000/- to destroy the photograph. Stating these facts, Annexure A1 complaint was sent to the DGP. Because of this, a complaint is registered against petitioner making false allegations. It is also submitted that petitioner is not involved in any cases after 1998. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the Sub Inspector has no motive to foist a false case against petitioner or to act in the manner alleged in Annexure A1. As per the materials in the case diary, petitioner was carrying 10 litres of distilled arrack and the co-accused was arrested. However, it is conceded that petitioner was involved in one case under Abkari Act only in the year 1986. Though petitioner is involved in other cases, the crimes were registered only upto the year 1998 and thereafter, he is not involved in any other crimes, except this case, it is submitted. 5. On hearing both sides, considering the peculiar circumstances under which the present crime is registered against petitioner, I find that petitioner has a strong defence to BA.697/09 3 put forward which he may be able have to establish only during trial. If anticipatory bail is rejected, he may be arrested and detained and harassed and therefore, it is only just and proper that anticipatory bail is granted to petitioner. Hence, the following order is passed: Petitioner shall surrender before the Magistrate Court concerned within seven days from today and he 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 Magistrate Court concerned, on the following conditions: i) Petitioner shall report before the investigating officer and co-operate with the investigation as and when directed. ii). Petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or influence the witnesses or intimidate them or commit any offence while on bail. Petition is allowed. K.HEMA, JUDGE vgs.