IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA TUESDAY, THE 29TH JULY 2008 / 7TH SRAVANA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 4373 of 2008(F) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER/ACCUSED : ----------------------------- SANJAYKUMAR, AGED 35 YEARS, S/O.SUBRAMANIAN, MONAMTHOTTATHIL HOUSE, PARIYARAM DESOM, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.NIREESH MATHEW RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT : ------------------------------------ STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY EXCISE INSPECTOR, EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, CHALAKKUDY, THRISSUR DISTRICT. REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ------------------------------ B.A. No.4373 OF 2008 ------------------------------ Dated this the 29th day of July, 2008 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offence is under Section 55(a) of Abkari Act. According to the prosecution, 475 litres of toddy allegedly kept in a vehicle in 19 cans were seized by the Excise Officials. The petitioner is the registered owner of the vehicle and he has no authority to keep the toddy in possession. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was not in possession of the vehicle at the time of the offence, though he was registered owner. Annexure A is an agreement relating to the sale of the vehicle in favour of the 2nd accused. The 2nd accused has already claimed the vehicle in the confiscation proceedings before the Assistant Excise Commissioner, it is submitted. The petitioner has absolutely no connection with the toddy seized from the vehicle or the vehicle. 4. It is also submitted that the toddy which is being seized, is genuine toddy even as per the admitted case of the B.A.4373/2008 2 prosecution itself. Toddy was being collected in the vehicle from toddy tappers and it was being transported. The only offence which would be committed by the Contractor who was collecting and transporting the toddy could only be a bailable offence under Section 56 of Abkari Act, for transporting toddy without permit, it is submitted. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner will be required for custodial interrogation, especially since the 2nd accused was granted anticipatory bail. But he has no objection in granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner, if the vehicle has been claimed by the 2nd accused as its owner and no claim is made by the petitioner over the vehicle. On hearing both sides I am satisfied that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner and the following order is passed: 1. The petitioner shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within 7 days from the date of this order and make himself available for interrogation. B.A.4373/2008 3 2. Thereafter in the event of the arrest of the petitioner if any, he shall be released on bail on his executing 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 shall co-operate with the investigation and report before him as and when directed. The petition is allowed. K.HEMA, JUDGE pac