IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 19TH JULY 2010 / 28TH ASHADHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 3288 of 2010() ------------------------------------------ CRIME NO.233/2010 OF VADAKKEKAD POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DIST. .............. PETITIONER (S): ACCUSED ---------------------------------------- PRADEEP, S/O. DAMODARAN, PANTHAYIL HOUSE, THEKKENIYEDATH PADI, PUNNAYOOR VILLAGE, CHAVAKKAD TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.PREMCHAND RESPONDENT(S): STATE ------------------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ------------------ B.A. No. 3288 of 2010 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 19th day of July, 2010 O R D E R Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offence is under Section 55(a) and (i) of the Abkari Act. According to prosecution, on 25.04.2010 at about 5.10 P.M., petitioner was found in possession of a bag and on seeing the police, he abandoned the bag and ran away. The incident happened in a bus stop and on inspection, the bag contained 14.850 litres of Indian Made Foreign Liquor. Hence, a case was registered against petitioner. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner is innocent of the allegations made. Nobody has a case that petitioner was found selling liquor. It is also submitted that the incident happened in a bus stop, but nobody has a case that he identified petitioner. Petitioner is implicated on a mistaken identity, it is submitted. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that petitioner was found running away, abandoning the article and on enquiry made with the people of the locality, B.A. No. 3288 of 2010 2 the identity of petitioner was clearly revealed on the date of occurrence itself. It is not correct to say that there is any mistake in the identity and various witnesses are already questioned by the police and their statements are recorded. 5. On hearing both sides and on considering the serious nature of the allegations made, I do not think that this is a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. In cases involving offence under Section 55(a) of the Abkari Act even, regular bail cannot be granted, if petition is opposed by learned Public Prosecutor and if the twin conditions stated in Section 41 A are not established. Except bare assertions of innocence, I do not find any materials to support such innocence. Petitioner is bound to surrender and co-operate with the investigation without any delay. 6. No further application for anticipatory bail by petitioner in this crime will be entertained by this court hereafter. Petition is dismissed. K. HEMA, JUDGE ln