IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 19TH JULY 2010 / 28TH ASHADHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 3752 of 2010() ----------------------------------------- C.R. NO.26/2009 OF NEDUMANGAD EXCISE RANGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. .................. PETITIONER/ACCUSED --------------------------------- SABU, S/O. SURENDRAN, MULLANGAL ROAD, THADATHARIKATHU VEEDU, PARANGODE.P.O., ARYANAD, NEDUMANGAD. BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV, SRI.K.K.DHEERENDRAKRISHNAN. RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT -------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM (C.R. NO. 26/2009 OF NEDUMANGAD EXCISE RANGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM). BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.M.S. BREEZ. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/07/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. K.HEMA, J. ------------------ B.A. No. 3752 of 2010 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 19th day of July, 2010 O R D E R Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 55(a) and 67 B of the Abkari Act. According to prosecution, on 24.04.2009 at about 10.30 A.M., a car was intercepted by the excise officials and first and second accused were found transporting a total quantity of 891 litres of spirit. First accused was arrested from the spot and petitioner(A2) ran away from the spot. On investigation, it is revealed that article was arranged by third accused. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner is innocent of the allegations made. Petitioner had introduced a person for the purchase of a car belonging to first accused. After the sale of the car, the purchaser did not pay the full amount to first accused. Therefore, first accused used to threaten petitioner and he filed a complaint before the S.I. of Police on 24.03.2009 (The copy is Annexure-I). Though first accused was called to B.A. No. 3288 / 2010 2 police station, he did not appear. First accused is on enmical terms with de facto complainant and he has threatened to harm him and he implicated the petitioner in the crime, when he was arrested, it is submitted. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that as per the case diary, petitioner was involved in the crime. It was pointed out that first accused on his arrest had given all details about petitioner's involvement in the offence. Even prior to the arrest of third accused, it was revealed from the statement of his mother and other witnesses that petitioner had close contact with third accused. Third accused is involved in the offence under the Abkari Act and on his arrest, he also implicated petitioner with this crime. He is the person, who has arranged the spirit for transportation by first and second accused. 5. On hearing both sides, and on going through the case diary, it appears that there are sufficient materials in the case diary to implicate petitioner with the crime. Not only the first accused but third accused also, implicated petitioner. Petitioner B.A. No. 3288 / 2010 3 has not been able to establish his innocence. Considering the serious nature of the allegations made, quantity of the contraband involved etc. I find that for interrogation, petitioner is required and this is a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. Petitioner will surrender and co-operate with investigation, without delay. 6. No further application for anticipatory bail by petitioner in this crime will be entertained by this court hereafter. Petition is dismissed. K. HEMA, JUDGE ln