IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN SATURDAY, THE 20TH AUGUST 2011 / 29TH SRAVANA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 5931 of 2011() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.88/2011 OF MANGALAM DAM POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 2 & 3: ---------------------------- 1. APPACHAN @ JOSEPH, AGED 63 YEARS, S/O.JOSEPH, PUTHIYA PARAMBIL VEEDU, MALLUKKODE, ELAVAMPADAM P.O., KANIMANGALAM VILLAGE, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. P.J.MATHEW, AGED 67 YEARS, S/O.JOSEPH, PUTHIYA PARAMBIL VEEDU, MALLUKKODE, ELAVAMPADAM P.O., KANIMANGALAM VILLAGE, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.NIREESH MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANGALAM DAM POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682031. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A.No.5931 of 2011 --------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of August, 2011 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are accused Nos.2 and 3 in Crime No.88 of 2011 of Mangalam Dam Police Station, Palakkad District. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 8(1) & (2) of the Abkari Act. 3. The prosecution case is that on 3.7.2011 at 11 P.M., the first accused Narayanan was found distilling arrack in a portion of the house belonging to accused Nos.2 and 3. Accused Nos.2 and 3 were not available in station. Narayanan was arrested on the spot. A quantity of 38 litres of wash was seized. The investigation revealed that Narayanan did so on the instructions given by accused Nos.2 and 3. BA No.5931/2011 2 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor. I have also perused the case diary. 5. Going by the materials on record, prima facie, the contention put forward by the second petitioner P.J.Mathew that there is no evidence as against him to connect him with the crime appears to be plausible. However, I do not think that there is dearth of materials so as to connect the first petitioner Appachan @ Joseph, prima facie, with the offence. 6. The offence alleged against the accused is serious in nature. 7. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find it just and proper to grant anticipatory bail to the first petitioner Appachan @ Joseph. However, I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the second petitioner P.J.Mathew. 8. In the event of arrest of the second petitioner (P.J.Mathew), the officer in charge of the police station shall BA No.5931/2011 3 release him on bail on his executing bond for ` 10,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: A) Petitioner No.2 shall report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M. and 11 A.M. on all Mondays for a period of one month ; B) Petitioner No.2 shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required ; C) Petitioner No.2 shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence ; D) Petitioner No.2 shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail; E) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled. The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated above. K.T.SANKARAN JUDGE csl