IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH JANUARY 2010 / 30TH POUSHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 2458 of 2009 CRIME NO.18 OF 2009 OF VYTHIRI POLICE STATION PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.4 -------------------------------------------- ASSAIN, AGED 40 YEARS, ADIYATTIL HOUSE, CHUNDALE P.O. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.VARGHESE RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, KOCHI-31. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NO. 2458 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 20th day of January, 2010 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.4 in Crime No.18 of 2009 of Vythiri Police Station. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Rule 16 of the Kerosene Control Order and Sections 3 and 7(1)(a) of the Essential Commodities Act. 3. The gist of the prosecution case is as follows: On 11.2.2009, the police party found accused Nos.1 to 3 engaged in filling kerosene into the diesel tank of a lorry owned by accused No.1. Accused No.2 is the driver of the autorickshaw and accused No.3 is the salesman of the ration shop belonging to accused No.4. The allegation is that the fourth accused, the dealer of the ration shop, sold the kerosene to accused No.1, which was transported in the goods autorickshaw driven by the second accused. The kerosene was being filled in the tank of the lorry owned by the first accused. B.A. NO. 2458 OF 2009 :: 2 :: 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that on inspection of the Ration Shop by the Rationing Inspector, he found that the stock available in the ration shop of the petitioner was correct and that there was no shortage or excess of stock. At this stage, I do not think that the report of the Rationing Inspector is relevant. The allegation is very grave. The kerosene was intended to be supplied to the ration card holders by way of Public Distribution System. The allegation is that kerosene to be distributed to the card holders was sold by the petitioner to accused No.1 for a higher profit. In an offence of this nature, I do not think that it is proper to grant anticipatory bail to the accused. If anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, it would adversely affect the proper investigation of the case. I am of the view that the petitioner is not entitled to the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Application is dismissed. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/