IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 2ND FEBRUARY 2010 / 13TH MAGHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 5802 of 2009() ----------------------------- CR NO.13/2007 OF NILESHWAR EXCISE RANGE, KASARAGOD DT. PETITIONER/ACCUSED: --------------------------------------- K.V.RATNAKARAN, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O.THURUMPAN, RESIDING AT MAYYIL IN KAYYUR VILLAGE, P.O.POTHAVUR, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SUNNY MATHEW RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT: --------------------------- STATE OF KERALA THROUGH THE EXCISE INSPECTOR, NILESHWAR EXCISE RANGE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.5802 of 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of February, 2010 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the accused in CR No.13 of 2007 of Nileshwar Excise Range. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section 55(g) of the Abkari Act. 3. The prosecution case is that on 24.4.2007, the petitioner was found in possession of 35 litres of wash. On seeing the Excise party, the petitioner ran away and therefore, he could not be arrested. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner could not be arrested even thereafter as he was absconding. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is no material to connect the petitioner with the offence. 5. After having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor, I am of the view that, prima facie, there are materials to connect the petitioner with the offence. BA No.5802/2009 2 6. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case and the nature of the offence alleged against the petitioner, I do not think that this is a fit case where anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. If anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, it would adversely affect the proper and smooth investigation of the cases. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Application is dismissed. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE csl