IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 27TH MAY 2010 / 6TH JYAISHTA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 2906 of 2010() ----------------------------- (CRIME NO.696/2010 OF NORTH PARAVOOR POLICE STATION) MP.1481\/2010 of J.M.F.C. - I, PARAVUR .................... PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED ------------------------------------------ ABDUL JALEEL, S/O. SHOUKKATHALI, VALIYAKATH HOUSE, KOTHAKULAMKARA, VALAPPAD VILLAGE,THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.JAYASREE MANOJ SRI.SREEJITH V.S. RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. 2. SUB INSEPCTOR OF POLICE, NORTH PARAVOOR POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. M.S. BREEZ. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. --------------------------------------------------- B.A. No. 2906 of 2010 --------------------------------------------------- Dated this 27th day of May, 2010. ORDER Petition for bail. 2. The offence alleged is under Section 55(a) of Abkari Act. According to prosecution, on 23.4.2010, 665 litres of spirit was seized from a tempo van. On investigation, 7th accused, who was residing close to the property from where the article was seized, was arrested and, it was revealed that, it was at the instance of first accused that the article was transported from Coimbatore to Kerala and petitioner (A1) was piloting the vehicle in which contraband article was transported by other accused. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the offence alleged is under Section 55(a) of Abkari Act. Even if the entire prosecution allegations are accepted, there is nothing to show that petitioner was in possession of the contraband article. Petitioner is not having any criminal antecedent and the articles were in abandoned condition when the seizure was effected. Petitioner is not residing anywhere close to the place of occurrence. Petitioner [B.A.No. 2906/2010] 2 is in custody for the past 34 days. 4. This petition is strongly opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that from the materials so far collected petitioner has a major role in the transportation. Accused no.7 is arrested and it is revealed from him that petitioner is the person who was instrumental for transporting the article from Coimbatore. It is also submitted that none of the other accused involved in this case are arrested. Therefore, if petitioner is released on bail at this stage, it will adversely affect the investigation. 5. On hearing both sides, considering the stage of investigation and the serious nature of the allegations made against petitioner, I am not inclined to grant bail to petitioner at this stage. Petition is dismissed. K. HEMA, JUDGE. Krs.