IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR MONDAY, THE 8TH JULY 2008 / 17TH ASHADHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 4020 of 2008() -------------------------------- CRIME NO. 91/2008 of KARUNAGAPPALLY EXCISE RANGE. ............................. PETITIONER/ACCUSED 2 & 4 --------------------------------- 1. MIDHUN MOHAN, S/O. MOHANAN MATTATHALATH VEETTIL, AZEEKAL MURI, ALAPPAD KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM. 2. ANEESH ,S/O. AMMINIKUTTAN KANDATHIL VEETTIL, CHERIYAZHEEKAL DESOM ALAPPAD, KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.B.MOHANLAL RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA , REPRESENTED BY THE EXCISE RANGE INSPECTOR, KARUNAGAPPALLY EXCISE RANGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI. M.S. BREEZE, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V. RAMKUMAR, J. ==================== Bail Application No. 4020 of 2008 ==================== Dated this the 8th day of July, 2008. O R D E R In this Petition filed under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. the petitioners who are accused Nos. 2 and 4 in Crime No. 91 of 2008 of Karunagappally Excise Range for offences punishable under sections 55(a) and 67 (B) of the Abkari Act for allegedly having been found in possession of 36 liters of Indian made foreign liquor seek their enlargement on bail. 2. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. 3. It is too early to accept the petitioners' contention that they have been falsely implicated in the case. Moreover, I am not satisfied that both the grounds enumerated under sec.41A (b) (ii) of the Abkari Act are present in this case so as to justify their release on bail. With the above observation this Application is dismissed. Dated this the 8th day of July, 2008. V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE. rv