IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA FRIDAY, THE 29TH AUGUST 2008 / 7TH BHADRA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 5397 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.51/2007 OF CHATHANNOOR EXCISE RANGE PETITIONER/ACCUSED:- --------------------------- LEELA, AGED 67, W/O.LATE CHELLAPPAN, CHARUVILA VEEDU, PANIYIL CHERRY, CHIRAKKALA VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.VENUGOPALAN NAIR RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE EXCISE INSPECTOR, EXCISE RANGE, CHATHANNOOR, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. THE ASST.EXCISE COMMISSIONER, KOLLAM. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 5397 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 29th day of August,2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. 2. Petitioner is the 1st accused in the crime. The alleged offence is under section 8(2) of the Abkari Act. According to the prosecution, Excise Inspector got reliable information that sale of arrack was being carried on in the provision shop by the 2nd accused and on inspection of the shop on 2-10-2007 at about 12 noon, petitioner who is the mother of the 2nd accused was found sitting in the shop on a chair and underneath the chair, a can was found. On examination of the can, it was found to contain 8.750 litres of arrack. Therefore, a case was registered against the petitioner as well as her son as accused 1 and 2 respectively. Petitioner was not arrested form the spot, since, according to respondent, a woman police constable was not available. 3. According to petitioner, she is absolutely innocent of the allegations made. She is falsely implicated along with her son under certain specific circumstances which were already referred to by this Court in order dated 29-7-2008 in B.A. No.4501/2008 filed by the 2nd accused. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that petitioner also stands on the same footing. BA 5397/08 -2- 4. On hearing both sides and on going through Annexure- A1 order of this Court in B.A. No.4501/2008, I find that for the reasons already referred to Annexure-A1 in detail, it is only just and proper that anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner. I do not find that I need repeat those contentions and my findings once again, for the purpose of this petition. The circumstances under which the case was registered were considered in Annexure-A1 order. 5. Hence, the following order is passed:- Petitioner shall surrender before the Magistrate Court concerned within seven days from today and if any bail application is filed, petitioner shall be released on bail on her executing a bond for Rs. 25,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate on condition that she will co-operate with the investigation. The application is allowed as above. K. HEMA, JUDGE. mn.