IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA FRIDAY, THE 26TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 4TH ASWINA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 5953 of 2008(B) ------------------------------------- CMP.4549/2008 of J.M.F.C.-I,PALAKKAD CRIME NO.27/2008 OF PALAKKAD EXCISE RANGE .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2 : ------------------------------------ TOMY ANTONY, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O.ANTONY RESIDING AT THOPPIL HOUSE, CO-OPERATIVE ROAD, VYTTILA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.GEO PAUL SRI. SANU MATHEW SRI.C.R.PRAMOD SRI.M.B.SANDEEP SRI. RAJANEESH.K.V RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT : ------------------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY EXCISE INSPECTOR, PALAKKAD EXCISE RANGE BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ------------------------------------------------- B.A.No.5953 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of September, 2008 O R D E R This petition is for bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 55(a) and (i) of Abkari Act. According to prosecution, the lorry driven by A1 was intercepted on 25.6.2008 by the Excise Officials. On examination of the lorry, it was found to contain 6080 litres of spirit in 190 cans in a concealed cabin. The first accused was arrested from the spot. During investigation, it is revealed that the petitioner who is the second accused is the owner of the lorry and he has also taken the lorry to Coimbatore for construction of a secret cabin for the purpose of transportation of liquor clandestinely. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has absolutely no connection with the lorry. He is not the owner. There is a registered owner for the lorry and there is absolutely nothing to show that the petitioner is in possession or has the ownership of the lorry. The petitioner was arrested on 22.8.2008 after about two months of arrest of the first accused. BA No.5953/08 2 First accused has not implicated the petitioner with the crime. The police is creating evidence falsely to implicate the petitioner, who has nothing to do with the crime, it is submitted. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned public prosecutor submitted that the registered owner of the vehicle was questioned and it is revealed that the vehicle was actually sold to the petitioner and he was in possession of the same on the date of the occurrence. It is also revealed in investigation that the petitioner along with his son, the third accused, and others had taken the lorry to Coimbatore for construction of a secret cabin for the purpose of transportation of liquor. Petitioner is the king-pin behind the transportation and the investigation is still not over. It will require sometime to complete the investigation because of the complicity. Hence, if petitioner is granted bail at this stage, it will adversely affect the investigation, it is submitted. 5. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that it may not be fit and proper to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage. The petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE csl