IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT THURSDAY, THE 27TH MARCH 2008 / 7TH CHAITHRA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 1870 of 2008() ----------------------------- CMP.120/2008 of J.M.F.C.,MAVELIKKARA CRIME NO.302/05 OF EXCISE RANGE, MAVELIKKARA. .................... PETITIONER --------------------------- SAMKUTTY S/O.GEORGE, AGED 45 YEARS PADINJARE MANNIL KOYIKKAL, HOUSE NO. XVI/419 KONNI VILLAGE, KOZHENCHERRY TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.S.REVEENDRAKUMAR RESPONDENTS: ------------- STATE OF KERALA,REP.BY EXCISE INSPECTOR EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, MAVELIKKARA REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. BY P.P. SRI. S.U. NAZAR. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- B.A. No. 1870 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of March, 2008 ORDER Application for regular bail. The petitioner faces allegations in a crime registered for offences punishable under the Kerala Abkari Act. 1050 litres of spirit were allegedly seized partly from a vehicle belonging to the petitioner. The petitioner is the 4th accused. Altogether, there are 4 accused persons. Accused 1 and 2 are the brothers and the 3rd accused is a cousin of the petitioner herein. He is admittedly the owner of the vehicle. The vehicle was driven by one of the co- accused. 1050 litres of spirit were brought to the Mavelikkara Railway Station as a railway parcel consignment. The offence was detected and the seizure was effected on 24/11/05. The co-accused were arrested. They have been enlarged on bail. The petitioner moved this Court for anticipatory bail in 2008 B.A. No. 1870 of 2008 -: 2 :- and it was at that stage that this Court happened to come across the very deplorable state of investigation in that crime. Observations were made. Higher authorities were alerted. Thereafter, serious investigation appears to have been undertaken. The petitioner's application for anticipatory bail was dismissed. He later surrendered before the learned Magistrate on 20/2/08. He continues in custody from that date. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is absolutely innocent. Except that the petitioner happens to be the owner of the vehicle concerned and that he happens to be the brother/cousin of the co-accused, there is absolutely no material to connect the petitioner in any way with the crime, submits the learned counsel for the petitioner. It is, in these circumstances, prayed that the petitioner, who has remained in custody from 20/2/08, may now be enlarged on bail subject to appropriate terms and conditions. 3. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that the investigation is not complete. The learned Public Prosecutor relies primarily on the confession statements of the accused persons including the petitioner herein which clearly reveal that it was a conjoint activity by all the 4 accused persons. The learned Public B.A. No. 1870 of 2008 -: 3 :- Prosecutor submits that this is not the stage where the evidence can be attempted to be weighed in golden scales. The magnitude of the crime, the culpable involvement of the petitioner etc., may be taken into account and, at any rate, the petitioner may not be enlarged on bail, it is submitted. The learned Public Prosecutor fairly concedes that the petitioner has no criminal antecedents; but submits that the materials presently available will clearly show that it was only a case of omission to detect such offences earlier and not a case where the petitioner was not involved in any criminal activity earlier. 4. I have considered all the relevant inputs. The Case Diary has been placed before me by the learned Public Prosecutor for my perusal. The confession statements of the accused have been flagged and revealed to me. I have gone through the other materials collected. I have anxiously considered all the relevant inputs. 5. In the wake of opposition by the learned Public Prosecutor, bail can be granted to the petitioner only if this Court is in a position to entertain both the satisfactions contemplated in Sec.41A of the Kerala Abkari Act. At the moment and with the available inputs, I am unable to entertain either of those two satisfactions. B.A. No. 1870 of 2008 -: 4 :- 6. In the result, this bail application is dismissed. But I may hasten to observe that the petitioner shall be at liberty to move the courts below or this Court for bail again at a later stage of the investigation – not at any rate, prior to 7/4/08. The Investigator shall, in the meantime, make every endeavour to complete the investigation. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge