IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 25TH MARCH 2008 / 5TH CHAITHRA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 1456 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.108/08 OF MAVELIKKARA POLICE STATION PETITIONER/ACCUSED ----------------------------------- ASHOKAN, AGED 34 YEARS, S/O. THEVAN, KOCHIKKAL, MANKAMKUZHY P.O., MAVELIKKARA. BY ADV. SRI.R.REJI RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ADDL. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MAVELIKKARA POLICE STATION. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.U. NAZAR. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. ------------------------------------------------- B.A. No. 1456 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of March, 2008 ORDER Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner apprehends arrest in a crime registered alleging offences punishable under the Kerala Abkari Act. On 20/2/08 at about 11.45 p.m. an autorikshaw was proceeding along the road under suspicious circumstances. The same was intercepted; but the three persons, who were in the vehicle, took to their heels and could not be apprehended. In the vehicle 175 litres of spirit was available. There were also certain documents relating to the petitioner in the said autorikshaw. The petitioner was seen at the time of occurrence near the scene of the occurrence by another person. The needle of suspicion is hence directed at the petitioner. The petitioner has not been formally arrayed as an accused so far. Investigation is in B.A. No. 1456 of 2008 -: 2 :- progress. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent. An attempt is made to explain the presence of documents belonging to the petitioner in the vehicle on the plea that he may have travelled in that vehicle earlier and may have forgotten to take such documents from the vehicle. The learned counsel for the petitioner, in these circumstances, prays that the petitioner may be granted anticipatory bail. 3. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that the petitioner has to be interrogated. The needle of suspicion is pointed at the petitioner strongly. There is absolutely no circumstance which can justify or warrant the invocation of the extraordinary equitable discretion under Sec.438 of the Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioner. It is not expedient or necessary in the interests of justice to permit the petitioner to be armed with an order of anticipatory bail. This petition may be dismissed. The petitioner may be directed to appear before the Investigating Officer and co-operate with the Investigating Officer for a proper investigation of the case. 4. I have considered all the relevant inputs and having B.A. No. 1456 of 2008 -: 3 :- considered all the relevant circumstances, I am persuaded to agree that there is merit in the opposition by the learned Public Prosecutor. I am not persuaded to agree that there are any circumstances in this case which can justify or warrant the invocation of the extraordinary equitable discretion under Sec.438 of the Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner, I agree with the learned Public Prosecutor, must co-operate with the Investigator and make himself available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer. It is not necessary, I am convinced, to permit the petitioner to be armed with an order of anticipatory bail at this stage. 5. This bail application is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- (R. BASANT, JUDGE) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge