IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 8TH OCTOBER 2009 / 16TH ASWINA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 5677 of 2009() ----------------------------------------- C.R. NO.102/2009 OF ADOOR EXCISE RANGE, PATHANAMTHITTA PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2: ----------------------------------------- RETHY, AGED 38 YEARS, W/O. VENUGOPAL, MANOJ BHAVANAM, KODUMON MURI, KODUMON P.O., KODUMON VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.NIREESH MATHEW RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: ---------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR, ADOOR EXCISE CIRCLE, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. SRI. TEKCHAND, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 5677 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 8th day of October, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.2 in C.R.No.102/2009 of Adoor Excise Range, Pathanamthitta. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section 8(1)(2) of the Abkari Act. 3. The prosecution case is that on 17/8/2009 at 6.20 P.M., on a search of the house of the accused persons, a quantity of 6.9 litres of arrack was seized. It is alleged that the accused persons were found in possession of arrack and the first accused was found pouring arrack from the can to the bottle. 4. The first accused was arrested and he was later released on bail. 5. The case of the petitioner is that the accused persons were falsely implicated by the Excise party. There was an incident, in which, several people of the locality obstructed B.A. No. 5677/2009 2 the vehicle of the Excise Party for some reasons. On account of the same, the petitioner was falsely implicated in the offence. The learned counsel for the petitioner referred to Annexure C and Annexure D petitions submitted before the Human Rights Commission. Annexure C petition was submitted by the people of the locality, while Annexure D petition was submitted by the petitioner. In these petitions, the incidents which took place on the particular day are narrated. The petitioner also relies on the newspaper report produced as Annexure B, which would indicate that on the date of incident, a quantity of ½ litre of Indian made foreign liquor was seized from the house of the petitioner and the other accused. 6. The Case Diary does not reveal that any independent witness was questioned by the investigating officer. 7. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence, and other circumstances, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioner, the officer in charge of the police station shall release B.A. No. 5677/2009 3 her on bail on her executing bond for Rs.10,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: A) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; B) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence. C) The petitioner shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail. D) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled. The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated above. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE scm