IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN THURSDAY, THE 21ST MAY 2009 / 31ST VAISAKHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 2583 of 2009() ----------------------------- (CRIME NO.107/2008 OF KAYAMKULAMEXCISE RANGE OFFICE) (S): PETITIONER/ACCUSED ------------------------ LEKHA,AGED 31 YEARS, W/O.AJIKUMAR,PRADEEP BHAVANAM, PUTHIYAVELLA NORTH MURI, KADALOOR VILLAGE,KARTHIKAPALLY TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.G.PRIYADARSAN THAMPI RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- THE EXCISE INSPECTOR, EXCISE RANGE OFFICE,KAYAMKULAM, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.JIKKU JACOB THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/05/2009, THE COURT ON 21/05/2009 PASSED THE FOLLOWING: SPC P.S.GOPINATHAN, J. ====================================== B.A.No.2583 of 2009 ====================================== Dated this the 21st day of May 2009 ORDER Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.107 of 2008 of Kayamkulam Excise Range for the offence under Sections 8(1) and 55(g) of the Kerala Abkari Act. The case was registered against the petitioner for having detected 105 litres of wash and 15 litres of arrack from a shed near the house occupied by the petitioner. Apprehending arrest, detention and torture at the hands of the investigating officer, the petitioner would seek an order directing the respondent to release the petitioner on bail. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would argue that the petitioner is a lady having two kids, but deserted by her husband who was a drunkard and that the petitioner is highly educated and a rank holder in a test conducted by the Public Service Commission and would shortly expect appointment as Lower Division Clerk and that the petitioner had no sort of dealing in contraband articles and that contraband, if any seized by the excise party was not from the house of the petitioner, but from a shed near the house of the petitioner upon which the petitioner had no sort of possession or control and that the petitioner was falsely implicated. 3. Having heard either side and taking into account the B.A.No.2583/2009 2 peculiar circumstances of the case and on gender consideration, I find that it would be appropriate to direct the respondent to release the petitioner on bail after interrogation in the event of her arrest. 3. In the result, this petition is allowed and it is ordered that the petitioner shall be released on bail after interrogation in the event of arrest on executing a bail bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty five thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the investigating officer on the following conditions:- i) The petitioner shall report before the Investigating Officer as and when called upon. ii) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any person who is likely to be acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer. P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE css/ B.A.No.2583/2009 3