IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2008 / 13TH PHALGUNA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 1253 of 2008() ----------------------------- CR.NO.143/08 OF KASARAGOD POLICE , KASARAGOD. PETITIONER/ACCUSED ----------------------------------- PADMAVATHI V., W/O. SHEKARAN B., PAICHAL HOUSE, R.D.NAGAR POST, KUDULU VILLAGE, KASARAGOD TALUK AND DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.B.SHAJIMON RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KASARAGOD POLICE STATION, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. JAI GEORGE. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- B.A. No. 1253 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of March, 2008 ORDER Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner - a woman, faces allegations under the Kerala Abkari Act. She was allegedly found to be in possession of 2.5 litres of arrack on 16/2/08. She allegedly abandoned the articles and took to her heels. She could not be apprehended by the police. Investigation is in progress. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent. He prays that directions under Sec.438 of the Cr.P.C. may be issued in favour of the petitioner. 3. This application is opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that all B.A. No. 1253 of 2008 -: 2 :- available indications reveal the complicity of the petitioner. The contemporaneous seizure mahazar reveals the name of the petitioner as the person who was keeping in possession of the contraband articles and who ran away from the scene of the crime. The learned Public Prosecutor, in these circumstances, submits that there are no circumstances to justify or warrant the invocation of the extraordinary equitable discretion under Sec.438 of the Cr.P.C. 4. Having considered all the relevant inputs, I find merit in the opposition by the learned Public Prosecutor. I am unable to perceive any features in this case that can justify or warrant the invocation of the discretion under Sec.438 of the Cr.P.C. 5. In the result, this bail application is dismissed; but with the observation that if the petitioner surrenders before the learned Magistrate and seeks bail, after giving sufficient prior notice to the Prosecutor in charge of the case, the learned Magistrate must proceed to pass appropriate orders on merits and expeditiously. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge B.A. No. 1253 of 2008 -: 3 :-