IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA TUESDAY, THE 13TH JULY 2010 / 22ND ASHADHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 2922 of 2010() ---------------------------------- CRIME NO. 292/2010 OF NOORANAD POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT ........................ PETITIONER/ACCUSED : ------------------------------ KARUNAKARAN, S/O.KARUTHAKUNJU, MANNADISSERI VEETTIL, PALLICKAL MURI, PALAMEL VILLAGE, BY ADV. SRI.RASHEED C.NOORANAD RESPONDENT: --------------- S.I.OF POLICE, NOORANAD POLICE STATION,REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM BY SRI. M.S.BREEZ PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ------------------ B.A. No. 2922 of 2010 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 13th day of July, 2010 O R D E R Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 5(a) of Kerala Rationing Order 1966 r/w Sections 3 and 7 of Essential Commodities Act. According to prosecution, on 6.5.2010 at about 7.30 P.M., the police party reached the spot on getting information that ration articles were kept in a godown for private sale. They found 39 sacks partly filled with rice and also wheat in the godown and they seized the commodities and registered a crime against the licensee of the ration shop under the above said Sections. Petitioner is the said licensee. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner is absolutely innocent of the allegations made. The articles seized in this case are not ration articles. Those were kept in the godown of a grocery shop, which is run by petitioner's wife. Local political leaders of the ruling party have personal vengeance against petitioner and they instigated the local public to conduct agitation in front of the ration shop. There is absolutely nothing to show that the articles seized are ration articles. B.A. No. 2922 / 2010 2 4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the police went to the spot on getting information that 'dharna' was going on in front of the ration shop alleging that ration articles are kept in the godown for private sale. Some rice and wheat were seized from the godown. Out of these articles, two sacks contained label of “supplyco”, which is intended for distribution through ration shop. 5. On hearing both sides, considering the serious nature of the allegations made, I do not think that this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. Petitioner may seek his remedy before the trial court. Considerations for grant of anticipatory bail and regular bail are different. Refusal of anticipatory bail granted by itself may not be a ground for refusal of regular bail. If any bail application is filed before Magistrate Court, learned Magistrate shall independently consider the bail application if any filed by petitioner and dispose of the same, untrammelled by any of the observations made in this order. Petition is dismissed. K. HEMA, JUDGE ln