IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 6TH MARCH 2008 / 16TH PHALGUNA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 1337 of 2008() ----------------------------- CR NO. 12/08 OF VAZHIKKADAVU EXCISE RANGE PETITIONER/ACCUSED ----------------------------------- MANI @ NARAYANAN, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.ANDI, KOLAVANNA HOUSE, ANAMARI, VAZHIKKADAVU POST, MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.K.SHIBILI NAHA RESPONDENTS: ------------- THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY EXCISE INSPECTOR, VAZHIKKADAVU EXCISE RANGE THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. JAI GEORGE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 1337 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 6th day of March, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner faces allegations under the Kerala Abkari Act. He was allegedly found to be in possession of 2 bottles, each containing 750 ml. and 500 ml. of arrack on 14.12.2008. When the Excise Party reached the scene, he allegedly abandoned the article and took to his heels. Investigation is in progress. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent and that the allegations raised against him are false. 3. The learned Prosecutor opposes the application. He submits that all the available indications do point to the culpability of the petitioner. The contemporaneous seizure mahazar reveals the involvement of the petitioner and there is no reason to assume that the allegations are false or vexatious. B.A.No. 1337 of 2008 2 4. Having considered all the relevant inputs, I find merit in the opposition by the learned Prosecutor. I am unable to perceive any features in this case, which would justify the invocation of the extra ordinary equitable discretion under section 438 Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioner. This I agree with the learned Prosecutor, is a fit case where the petitioner must resort to the ordinary and normal procedure of appearing before the Investigator or the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail in the usual course. 5. This application is accordingly dismissed. I may however hasten to observe that if the petitioner appears before the learned Magistrate and applies for bail after giving sufficient prior notice to the Prosecutor in charge of the case, the learned Magistrate must proceed to pass orders on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. (R. BASANT) Judge B.A.No. 1337 of 2008 3 tm