IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 16TH JUNE 2008 / 26TH JYAISHTA 1930 Bail Appl.No. 3453 of 2008 ----------------------------- CRMP.99/2008 of SPL. COURT (NDPS ACT CASES), THODUPUZHA CRIME No. 1 OF 2008 OF NES, ADIMALY. .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED: --------------------------- JAYAKUMAR, S/O.BALAKRISHNAN, PUTHENPURACKAL HOUSE, NR CITY P.O., RAJAKKAD VILLAGE, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV RESPONDENT: ----------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM (CRIME NO. 1 OF 2008 OF NES, ADIMALY). BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. K.S. SIVAKUMAR. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ------------------------------------------- B.A.No.3453 of 2008 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of June, 2008 ORDER Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. According to the prosecution, on 7.1.2008, when the Excise officials were on patrol duty and they were examining the vehicles, a vehicle came from Neriyamangalam side and when signal was given, the driver stopped the vehicle and ran away. He could not be arrested. The vehicle was seized and it was found that a packet was concealed in the jeep in such a way that it was not visible from outside. It contained 19 kgs. of ganja. The vehicle was seized in the custody and a crime was registered. Later, on investigation, it was found that the vehicle belonged to the petitioner and hence, he is arrayed as an accused. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is totally innocent of the allegations made. Though his name is shown in the registration certificate, he had already sold the vehicle on 30.11.2007 and handed over its possession to one Balakrishnan. The name was not altered in the RC, since there BA No.3453/08 2 was hypothecation, it is submitted. It is also stated that the petitioner appeared before the Excise Officials, produced the certificate and explained his innocence. But, they threatened the document writer and obtained a false statement from him and did not make any investigation to know who actually is the owner of the vehicle. 4. Learned public prosecutor opposed this bail application and contended that the agreement is an absolutely false document. The said document was falsely fabricated through the document writer, after the vehicle was seized by the Excise Officials. The statement of the document writer is available in the case diary and these facts are revealed from it. It was also stated that though notice was given to the petitioner, being the RC owner, he did not appear before the Excise Officials. On enquiry made, it is understood that the person to whom the vehicle allegedly transferred is not in existence and that a fake name was given in the agreement. 5. On hearing both sides and going through the case diary, I find that the learned public prosecutor made the submissions based on the materials available in the case diary. BA No.3453/08 3 On the facts and circumstances of this case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. The petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE csl