IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH JUNE 2008 / 21ST JYAISHTA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 3335 of 2008() --------------------------------------- CRIME NO.17/2008 OF KAYAMKULAM EXCISE RANGE ..... PETITIONER : 1ST ACCUSED ---------------------------- AJI, S/O.GOPALAN THANDALATHU PADEETTATHIL, MUTHUKULAM VILLAGE ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SMT.A.SALINI LAL RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, REP. BY EXCISE INSPECTOR, KAYAMKULAM, RANGE. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. ----------------------------------- B.A. No. 3335 OF 2008 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of June, 2008. O R D E R This is a petition for anticipatory bail. 2. According to the prosecution, the Excise Officials got reliable information that manufacture of illicit arrack was going on in the property of the second accused and accordingly, they went to the spot and found certain materials which are used for distilling arrack. 1040 litres of wash and other utensils were seized from the spot. But the accused were not present at the spot. Later on, it is revealed in investigation that the accused were engaged in distillation and they were in possession of the contraband articles. 3. This petition is opposed. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is nothing in the mahazar to show the presence of the accused at the scene and he has nothing to do with the offence. The incident occurred in the property of the second accused for which the first accused was not responsible, it is submitted. In the absence of evidence, the petitioner may be granted anticipatory bail, it is submitted. B.A. No. 3335/08 2 4. Learned Public Prosecutor pointed out that though the accused were not present at the time when Excise Officials reached the place of occurrence, on investigation it is revealed that these people were involved in the offence. They were found engaged in distillation of illicit liquor and there are statements of witnesses to that effect in the case diary. In the above circumstances, I do not find any ground to grant anticipatory bail. This petition is dismissed. K. HEMA, JUDGE. smp