IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 6TH JULY 2009 / 15TH ASHADHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 3622 of 2009 CRIME NO.103 OF 2008 OF PATHANAMTHITTA EXCISE RANGE PETITIONER/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- SURESH, S/O.THANKAPPAN, BLOCK NO.6,EZHIKKADU COLONY, KURICHIMUTTOM, KOZHENCHERRY TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.V.ANIL (K/1480/98) RESPONDENT: STATE -------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM(CRIME NO.103 OF 2008 OF PATHANAMTHITTA EXCISE RANGE) PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NO. 3622 OF 2009 C ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 6th July, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.103 of 2008 of Pathanamthitta Excise Range. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section 55(a) of the Abkari Act. 3. I have perused the case diary. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the house from where the spirit was allegedly seized does not belong to the petitioner and the house belongs to his father Thankappan. The petitioner relies on Annexure 2 certificate to show that from 2005 onwards he is residing in Mumbai. 5. The father of the petitioner is the signatory to the seizure mahazar. The prosecution case is that just a few minutes before their search in the house, the petitioner had left the house. 6. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case and B.A. NO. 3622 OF 2009 :: 2 :: the nature and gravity of the offence, I do not think that this is a fit case where anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/