IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 18TH MARCH 2010 / 27TH PHALGUNA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 1605 of 2010() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.59/06 OF PATHANAPURAM EXCISE RANGE, KOLLAM .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED-A4 ----------------------------------------- GOPAKUMAR, AGED 33 YEARS, S/O.BALAKRISHNA PILLAI, MANJAKKALA MURI, THALAVOOR VILLAGE, PATHANAPURAM TALUK, NOW RESIDING AT AMBAZHAVELIL VEEDU, CHERUPUNCHA MURI, PERINGANADU VILLAGE, ADOOR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.AJITH MURALI RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.1605 of 2010 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of March, 2010 O R D E R The petitioner had filed Bail Application No.739 of 2010 before this Court which was dismissed by the order dated 10th February, 2010. For the sake of convenience, the order dated 10th February, 2010 is extracted below: “This is an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.4 in Crime No.59 of 2006 of Pathanapuram Excise Range, Kollam District. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section 55(a) of the Abkari Act. 3. The gist of the prosecution case is the following: On 19.7.2006, the Excise party found a lorry parked on the side of the road. They also found that a person was handing over a can kept in the lorry to a motor cyclist. On seeing the Excise party, the lorry was started and driven away. The motor cyclist also escaped. The investigation revealed that accused No.1 was the motor cyclist. The Excise party found the lorry in the workshop run by the first accused. On BA No.1605/2010 2 inspection of the lorry, it was found that a quantity of 12390 litres of spirit was kept concealed in the lorry. The spirit was seized. The investigation further revealed that accused No.4, along with accused Nos.2 and 3, had transported the spirit with the help of accused No.1. Accused Nos.2 and 3 are the close associates of accused No.4. It is also alleged that the workshop was taken on rent by accused No.1 with the active help rendered by accused No.4 on the specific understanding that the lorry containing spirit should be parked inside the workshop. There was also an understanding for sharing of profits on account of the sale of spirit between accused Nos.4 and 1 along with others. 4. The petitioner was evading arrest from 2006 onwards. He surrendered before court only on 21.1.2010 and he was remanded to judicial custody. The Bail Application filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the learned Magistrate as per the order dated 28.1.2010. 5. Large quantity of spirit is involved in the case. The petitioner is said to be the kingpin of the incident. It is alleged that the petitioner had made enough preparations on a long term basis for the transportation of spirit in lorries and every arrangement was made for the safe keeping of the lorries containing spirit. BA No.1605/2010 3 6. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence and the allegations levelled against the petitioner, I do not think that the petitioner can be released on bail at this stage. The investigation is not over. If the petitioner is released on bail at this stage, it would adversely affect the proper investigation of the case. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Application is dismissed.” 2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the investigation is now over and charge sheet was filed. 3. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the charge sheet was filed on 27.2.2010. 4. The petitioner was not available from 2006 to 2010. There is no satisfactory explanation as to why he was not available in station. However, I do not think that the bail need be refused to the petitioner on that ground. At the same time, that conduct on the part of the petitioner would justify imposing stringent conditions while granting bail. BA No.1605/2010 4 5. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the duration of the judicial custody undergone by the petitioner, the nature of the offence and the fact that the charge sheet was filed in the case, I am of the view that bail can be granted to the petitioner on stringent conditions. The petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing bond for Rs.1,00,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-III, Punalur, subject to the following conditions: a) The petitioner shall report before the Excise Inspector, Pathanapuram Excise Range between 9 A.M. and 11 A.M. on all Mondays and Thursdays, until further orders; b) The petitioner shall appear before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-III, Punalur as well as before the Sessions Court concerned, after committal, on all the posting dates, without fail, unless the court concerned finds justifiable reason for the absence of the petitioner. c) The petitioner shall surrender his passport before the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-III, Punalur within a period of one week from today. If the petitioner does not hold an Indian passport, an affidavit sworn to by him to that effect shall be filed within one week before the learned Magistrate ; BA No.1605/2010 5 d) The petitioner shall not leave the State of Kerala without getting prior permission of the court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class-III, Punalur or the Sessions court concerned after committal of the case. e) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence; f) The petitioner shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail; g) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled. The Bail Application is allowed as above. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE csl