IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 19TH JANUARY 2009 / 29TH POUSHA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 7879 of 2008() ---------------------------------------- CRIME NO.632/2008 OF AMBALAMUGAL POLICE STATION. ........ PETITIONER (S) /IST ACCUSED ------------------------------------------ MANOJ V.K., AGED 30 YEARS, S/O.KALUKURUMBAN, VELLUMANAKUZHIKAROTT, KARIMUGAL. BY ADV. SRI.K.V.SABU RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, AMBALAMUGAL POLICE STATION, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ------------------------------ B.A. No.7879 OF 2008 ------------------------------ Dated this the 19th day of January, 2009 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offence is under Section 55(a) of Abkari Act. According to prosecution, accused nos.1 to 3 were found in possession of 5 litres of arrack and they were also consuming liquor. The incident happened on 06.12.2008. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner is absolutely innocent of the allegations made. He is only the owner of the vehicle, from which, the article was allegedly seized. Accused nos.2 and 3 were arrested from the spot and released on bail. Petitioner is arrayed as accused only in the capacity of the owner. He was not even present at the place and he was not arrested from the spot. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that accused nos. 2 and 3 were arrested, when they were found sitting inside the car and consuming liquor and the investigation reveals that all the three were consuming liquor from the car owned and driven by first accused and the crime B.A.No.7879 of 2008 2 was detected when the first accused went out of the car to purchase some drinks to mix with the arrack. Therefore, accused nos.2 and 3 alone could be arrested at the spot. It is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail, it is submitted. On hearing both sides, considering the facts of the case, I find that it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. Petitioner is directed to surrender before the Investigating Officer and co-operate with the investigation. Whether he surrenders or not, police is at liberty to arrest him and proceed in accordance with law. The petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE pac