IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 22ND JANUARY 2008 / 2ND MAGHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 285 of 2008() ---------------------------- C.R.1/08 OF MATTANCHERRY EXCISE RANGE PETITIONER/ACCUSED ----------------------------------- K.LOGANATHAN @ LAWRANCE, MAYFAIR VEETTIL, CHIRAKKAL DESOM, MUNDAMVELI, PALLURUTHY VILLAGE, KOCHI TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS CHAZHUKKARAN SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY EXCISE INSPECTOR, EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, MATTANCHERRY, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ADV.SRI.JAI GEORGE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` B.A. No. 285 OF 2008 E ```````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 22nd day of January, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. Petitioner, a former defence personnel, is alleged to have kept in his possession 17 bottles of IMFL, each containing 750 ml, which was drawn by him from the defence canteen. The excise officials, on receipt of prior information, had reached the house of the petitioner and had effected recovery of the contraband liquor. It is alleged that the petitioner had kept such quantity of contraband liquor for distribution/sale. The detection/seizure was made on 7.1.08. Investigation is in progress. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even if the entire allegations were accepted, the petitioner has not committed any non-bailable offence. The monthly quota of liquor issued to him had been kept by him unused. No non- BA.285/08 : 2 : bailable offence can be said to be committed from the mere fact that the quantity possessed exceeds the maximum permitted to be possessed under the Kerala Abkari Act. In any view of the matter, the petitioner does not deserve to endure the trauma of arrest and detention. The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigator. Subject to appropriate conditions anticipatory bail may be granted to him, it is prayed. 3. The learned Public Prosecutor does not oppose the application for anticipatory bail but points out that it is the case of the detecting official that the information received by him suggested that the petitioner is indulging in sale/distribution of such liquor which he had drawn from the defence outlet. No specific tangible material is yet available to show that the petitioner is indulging in any such objectionable sale punishable under Section 55(i) of the Kerala Abkari Act. The mere fact that he has kept in his possession unused liquor issued earlier in his name by the defence canteen cannot by itself persuade this Court to draw BA.285/08 : 3 : the inference that the petitioner was indulging in illicit sale. The matter deserves to be investigated into further. But, I am satisfied that the petitioner does not deserve to be arrested and incarcerated on such allegations. 4. In the result, this petition is allowed. Following directions are issued under Section 438 Cr.P.C in favour of the petitioner. i) Petitioner shall surrender before the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction at 11 a.m on 29.1.08. He shall be released on regular bail on condition that he executes a bond for Rs.25,000/-(Rupees twenty five thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate. ii) The petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation before the investigating officer between 10 a.m and 5 p.m on 30.1.08. During this period, the investigating officer shall be at liberty to interrogate the petitioner in custody and take all necessary steps for the proper conduct BA.285/08 : 4 : of the investigation in this crime. Thereafter, the petitioner shall so appear as and when directed by the investigating officer in writing to do so. (iii) If the petitioner does not appear before the learned Magistrate as directed in clause (i), directions issued above shall thereafter stand revoked and the police shall be at liberty to arrest the petitioner and deal with him in accordance with law, as if these directions were not issued at all. (iv) If he were arrested prior to 29.1.08, he shall be released from custody on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only) without any sureties, undertaking to appear before the learned Magistrate on 29.1.08. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) aks