IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 5TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 7205 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.43/08 OF NEYYATTINKARA EXCISE RANGE PETITIONER/ ACCUSED --------------------------------------- MANIYAN, S/O.SANKARAN NADAR, AGED 36, X'IAN,PADIJARA MALAMCHARUVU, ERUTHAVOOR, BALARAMAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.BALAGOVINDAN RESPONDENT(S): STATE & COMPLAINANT ---------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. EXCISE RANGE INSPECTOR, NEYYATTINKARA. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ----------------------------------------- B.A.No. 7205 of 2008 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th November, 2008 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. According to prosecution, petitioner was found in possession of 150 litres of arrack. He was driving the auto rickshaw and on seeing the Excise officials, he abandoned the auto rickshaw and ran away. He is also the R.C. Owner of the vehicle. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner is absolutely innocent of the allegations made. Petitioner had sold his auto rickshaw in the year 2007. But, he is implicated in the offence only because he happened to be the R.C owner of the vehicle. In case petitioner is arrested, he will be tortured and hence, he may be granted anticipatory bail, it is submitted. 4. This petition is strongly opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that there are materials in the case diary to reveal that petitioner was the person who was driving the auto rickshaw at the time of offence. Petitioner's wife herself was questioned by the Excise officials and it was revealed that he is not only the R.C owner of the vehicle, but he was the person who was driving the auto rickshaw at the relevant time. Petitioner had run away from the place of occurrence and he could not be arrested BA.7205/08 2 from the spot. It is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail, it is submitted. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that in the nature of the allegations made, it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. The offence is committed as early as on 27.8.2008 and petitioner could not be arrested so far. Petitioner is directed to surrender before the investigating officer without any delay and co- operate with the investigation. Whether petitioner surrenders or not, police is at liberty to arrest him and proceed in accordance with law. With this direction, petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE vgs.