IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH JULY 2009 / 17TH ASHADHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 2664 of 2009() ----------------------------------------- CRIME NO.63/2009 OF KARUNAGAPPALLY EXCISE RANGE PETITIONER/ACCUSED: -------------------------------------- SURENDRAN, S/O. VELU, JIBIN BHAVAN, (PUTHOOR VEEDU), NAMBARUVIKALA MURI, KARUNAGAPPALLY VILLAGE, KARUNAGAPPALLY TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.T.GOPALAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT/ COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SUB INSPECTOR EXCISE RANGE, KARUNAGAPPALLY, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. SRI. M.S. BREEZ, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No.2664 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 8th day of July, 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 the accused in Crime No.63/2009 of Karunagappally Excise Range. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 55(a) and (i) of the Abkari Act. 3. The prosecution case is that on 9/04/2009, the Excise Party got information that the petitioner is a person habitually involved in purchasing Indian made liquor from the Beverage Corporation, storing and selling it. They also got information that the Autorikshaw driven by the petitioner was going through a particular way. They waited. The Autorikshaw came. On seeking the Excise Party, the petitioner who was driving the Autorikshaw ran away. The Excise Party took into custody the Autorikshaw and found a quantity of 15 litres of Indian made foreign liquor in the Autorikshaw. Mahzar was prepared and the Autorikshaw was seized. On 9/04/2009 itself, the matter was forwarded to the B.A. No.2664/2009 Deputy Excise Commissioner, Kollam. 4. The case of the petitioner is that he is an Autorikshaw driver and he was not involved in any offence or any Abkari offence. Two persons hired his Autorikshaw and asked him to wait near the Beverage Corporation outlet. Those persons continued to travel in the Autorikshaw after some time. When the Excise Party intercepted the Autorikshaw, the two persons travelling in the Authorikshaw ran away. Excise Party took into custody the Autorikshaw. The petitioner was directed to furnish the names and address of the persons who ran away. On 11/04/2009, he went to the Excise Office and furnished the names and addresses of those persons. At that time, the petitioner realized that he was made an accused in the case. On 30/04/2009, the petitioner submitted a representation to the Excise Commissioner (Annexure A) and to the Asst. Excise Commissioner, Kollam (Annexure B) in which he stated the true facts. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is innocent and that he has been falsely implicated in the case. 5. I have perused the Case Diary. The Mahzar shows that B.A. No.2664/2009 there was only one person in the Autorikshaw. He was the driver of the Autorikshaw. There were no passengers in the Autorickshaw. The driver of the vehicle ran away when the Excise Party intercepted the vehicle. On 9/04/2009 itself, the vehicle was forwarded to the Assistant Deputy Excise Commissioner, Kollam. 6. In the light of these facts as revealed in the Case Diary file, prima facie, I do not think that the case put forward by the petitioner can be accepted. I do not think that this is a case where the discretionary remedy available under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure can be invoked by the petitioner. The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE scm