IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 20TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 29TH KARTHIKA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 6917 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRMP.2475/2008 of ADDL.DISTRICT COURT-I,MAVELIKKARA CRIME NO. 349/2008 OF NOORANADU POLICE STATION PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED: ------------------------------ BABU PRAKASH S/O.RAGHAVA KURUP, AGED 45 YEARS CHAMAVILAYIL HOUSE,ERUMAKUZHY MURI,PALAMEL VILLAGE BY ADV. SRI.BECHU KURIAN THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM THROUGH SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE NOORANAD POLICE STATION, MAVELIKKARA. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A. No. 6917 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 20th day of November,2008 O R D E R Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under sections 55(a) and 8(2) of the Abkari Act. According to prosecution, on getting reliable information, police went to house of 2nd accused and on reaching there, they found accused 1 and 2 in the house. From the house 3000 litres of spirit were recovered. The 1st accused ran away from the scene. The 2nd accused was arrested and on questioning him, it was revealed that he had rented out two rooms in the house to 3rd accused and it was from one of such rooms that the spirit was recovered. The 3rd accused had taken it on rent for the purpose of keeping the spirit for the use of 1st accused. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that some unidentifiable person had run away from the scene and petitioner has been falsely implicated as an accused, only because he is a neighbour of the 2nd accused. Petitioner is absolutely innocence of the allegations made. He has nothing to do with the article or the house. Hence, he may be granted anticipatory bail, it is submitted. BA 6917/08 -2- 4. This petition is strongly opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that 1st accused was found at the scene by the police. He was identified at the scene. The witnesses were also questioned and from their statements it is confirmed that person who ran away is the 1st accused. It is also submitted that his name and address were shown in the mahazar and other records prepared on the very same day. The fact that 1st accused is involved in the crime is disclosed from the confession made by 2nd accused also. The matter is being investigated into in detail. At this stage of investigation, if petitioner is granted anticipatory bail, it will adversely affect the investigation. In a serious offence like this, anticipatory bail may not be granted, it is submitted. 5. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied of the submissions made by learned Public Prosecutor and I find that this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. In a case involving offence under the Abkari Act, unless the innocence of accused can be established even regular bail cannot be granted, in view of section 41A of the Abkari Act. The incident occurred on 9-7-2008, petitioner's name and address find a place in the prosecution records on the very same day and he could not be arrested so far, and he is required for investigation. BA 6917/08 -3- Hence, petitioner is directed to surrender before the Investigating Officer without any delay and co-operate with the investigation. Whether he surrenders or not, police is at liberty to arrest him and proceed in accordance with law. With this direction, this petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. mn.