IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA TUESDAY, THE 15TH JULY 2008 / 24TH ASHADHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 4465 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO. 35/2008 OF KATTAKADA EXCISE RANGE PETITIOENR : ACCUSED ------------------------ RAJAN, KALLUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, MANNADIKONAM, OORUTTAMBALAM.P.O. BY ADV. SRI.R.T.PRADEEP SRI.V.VIJULAL RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 4465 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 15th day of July, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail 2. The alleged offences are under sections 8(1) and (2) of the Abkari Act. According to the prosecution, while the Excise officials were on patrol duty on 23-5-2008 at about 6.30p.m., they found a person was carrying a can at a distance of 25 feet and on seeing them, he abandoned the article and ran away. He could not be arrested. Thereafter, on examination, it was found that the can contained 3 litres of arrack. On enquiry, it was found that the said person was the petitioner. On being satisfied that the petitioner is the accused, a crime was registered under section 8(1) and (2) of the Abkari Act. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was involved in similar offences in the years 2003, 2004 and 2005. Thereafter, he has reformed himself and is not dealing with any contraband articles. But, there was an attempt in 2007 to implicate him falsely in an offence under the Abkari Act. Hence, he filed an application for anticipatory bail. As per Annexure-I order, the said application was disposed of, since BA 4465/2008 -2- the learned Public Prosecutor filed a report stating that there was no fresh case registered against the petitioner and that he was accused in four Abkari cases where he was granted bail. It was found that the apprehension of the petitioner that he was likely to be arrested in connection with some new cases involving abkari offence was baseless. Hence the application was rejected accepting the report of the respondent. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is falsely implicated in this case. The application for anticipatory bail was dismissed as early as on 1-8-2007. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the present crime is in respect of an incident which occurred on 23-5-2008 after the lapse of considerable period. The application is opposed. It is submitted that there is absolutely no motive for the officers to falsely implicate the petitioner in an offence of this nature. Issuance of a blanket order of anticipatory bail would only aid the petitioner to commit the offence under the Abkari Act , it is submitted. 5. On hearing both sides and on perusal of the case diary, I find that the petitioner is prima facie involved in an offence under sections 8(1) and (2) of the Abkari Act. There is nothing on record to show that the detecting officer or any official was personally motivated to implicate the petitioner in a false case. In the absence of any materials, a bald allegation made BA 4465/2008 -3- against the respondent will not be sufficient to come to a conclusion that this is a falsely foisted case. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is prepared to surrender before the court below. He may do so, if so advised. The application is dismissed. K. HEMA, JUDGE. mn.