IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 1ST PHALGUNA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 979 of 2008() ---------------------------- C.R.NO. 7/08 OF CHENGANNOOR EXCISE RANGE PETITIONER/ACCUSED ----------------------------------- VANAJAMMA, W/O. LATE VIJAYAN, VADAKKECHERUVIL HOUSE, ALA P.O., CHENGANNOOR. BY ADV. SRI.K.B.HARSHAN SRI.P.S.PRADEEP RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE EXCISE INSPECTOR, CHENGANNOOR RANGE, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. JAI GEORGE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 979 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 20th day of February, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner, a woman, faces allegations under the Kerala Abkari Act. The petitioner was allegedly found to keep in her possession 4 litres of arrack on 19.1.2008. She was intercepted. But as the detecting Excise Party did not consist of any woman police officials, she was not arrested. Investigation is in progress. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. The learned Prosecutor submits that the petitioner, a woman aged about 38 years is an accused in yet another crime registered under the Abkari Act. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent. She is sick. She has three young daughters. She may in these circumstances, be granted anticipatory bail, it is prayed. 3. The learned Prosecutor opposes the application. He submits that all the available indications point to the complicity of the petitioner. She may be directed to appear before the B.A.No. 979 of 2008 2 Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail in the ordinary course. 4. I have considered all the relevant inputs. I find merit in the opposition by the learned Prosecutor. I am unable to find any features in this case, which would justify the invocation of the extra ordinary equitable discretion under section 438 Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioner. This I am satisfied is a fit case where the petitioner must resort to the ordinary and normal procedure of appearing before the Investigator or the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail in the ordinary course. 5. This application is accordingly dismissed. I may however hasten to observe that if the petitioner appears before the learned Magistrate and applies for bail after giving sufficient prior notice to the Prosecutor in charge of the case, the learned Magistrate must proceed to pass orders on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. (R. BASANT) tm Judge B.A.No. 979 of 2008 3 tm