IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 21ST KARTHIKA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 6650 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRMP.2793/2008 of ADDL.D.C. & ADDL.MACT,ALAPPUZHA. CRIME NO.550/2008 OF ALAPPUZHA SOUTH POLICE STATION PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1 & 2 ------------------------------------------------ 1. SHANAVAZ, S/O.SHAMSHUDEEN, KOTTILAPPATTU KIZHAKKETHIL, KARIVIKULANGARA, PATHIVOOR WEST, KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA. 2. ANAZ, S/O.ABDUL KHADAR, PULINCHUVATTIL, PALLIMUKKU, KAYAMKULAM, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.M.P.MADHAVANKUTTY RESPONDENT(S): STATE -------------------- THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ALAPPUZHA SOUTH POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A. No. 6650 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 12th day of November,2008 O R D E R Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under sections 55(a) and (i) of the Abkari Act. According to prosecution, on14-9-2008 at about 7 p.m. police party seized 15.750 litres of Indian Made Foreign Liquor from a shop allegedly managed by petitioners, near the K.S.R.T.C. bus stand. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that there is no scrap of paper to show that petitioners were in possession of the shop from where article was seized. There is nothing to show that they have any connection with the shop. Therefore, they he may be granted bail, it is submitted. Learned counsel for petitioners also submitted that on the previous day police arrested a person from the premises of the same shop and petitioners had raised objection against such arrest. Hence, police being offended by the objection raised, falsely registered a case against petitioners, it is submitted. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that petitioners were physically present in the shop at the time of search but they escaped evading arrest and hence, they could not be arrested. Though the place is described as a BA 6650/08 -2- “shop”, it is not actually any building. It was something like a cart which is transformed into the shape of a shop which stands on four wheels of a cycle. It was from this type of a shop that liquor was being sold. Nobody can expect any document to prove ownership or possession of such a shop, it is submitted. Learned Public Prosecutor also submitted that there are witnesses also to support the allegations made against petitioners and hence, it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. 5. On hearing both sides, I find that there are only bare assertions from the side of petitioners about their innocence. This Court cannot act on such mere assertions at this stage. Considering the nature of allegations made, anticipatory bail cannot be granted, unless petitioners establish that they are innocent of the allegations made and that they will not repeat the offence. In the case of an offence falling under Abkari Act, there is a bar even in granting regular bail, by virtue of section 41A of the Abkari Act ,unless the twin conditions stated therein are satisfied. 6. The seizure was effected and offence was detected on 14-9-2008 and petitioners are not available for arrest or investigation. They have also not surrendered before the Magistrate Court. BA 6650/08 -3- Hence, petitioners are directed to surrender before the Magistrate court concerned or before the before the police and co-operate with the investigation. Whether they surrender or not, police is at liberty to arrest petitioners and proceed in accordance with law. With this direction, this petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. mn.