IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 22ND AUGUST 2011 / 31ST SRAVANA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 6500 of 2011 CRIME NO.6500 OF 2011 OF KUTTAMPUZHA POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM. PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.2: -------------------------------------- BINESH MATHEW, S/O.MATHEW, VALIYAPARAMBIL, NJAYAPPILLI P.O., SATHRAPPADI, KUTTAMPUZHA VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.B.ARUNKUMAR RESPONDENT: --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KUTTAMPUZHA POLICE STATION, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.MANU THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ Bail Appl. NO. 6500 OF 2011 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 22nd day of August, 2011 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.2 in Crime No.106 of 2011 of Kuttampuzha Police Station, Ernakulam District. 2. The offences alleged against the accused are under Section 8(1) and (2) of the Abkari Act and Sections 308, 182 and 203 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is the following: On 27.1.2011, accused Nos.1 and 2 purchased two cans and filled the same with arrack. They placed the cans near the gear box of the jeep belonging to the brother of accused No.1. Accused No.1 was not in good terms with his brother. The intention of the accused was to implicate the brother of accused No.1 in an abkari offence. The jeep was taken by the brother of accused No.1. The accused informed BAIL APPL. NO. 6500 OF 2011 :: 2 :: the Excise Officials that the brother of accused No.1 was transporting arrack in his jeep. The brother of accused No.1 was apprehended by the Excise Officials and a crime was registered against him under the provisions of the Abkari Act. He was arrested and he was remanded to judicial custody. Investigation revealed that the brother of accused No.1 was falsely implicated in the case to wreak vengeance against him and that the whole episode was manipulated by the accused in the present case by giving false information to the Excise Officials. 4. The petitioner, who is the second accused, apprehends arrest and, therefore, he has filed this application for anticipatory bail. 5. The allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not think that the petitioner is entitled to get the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The matter requires investigation. Custodial interrogation of the petitioner may be required in the case. If anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, BAIL APPL. NO. 6500 OF 2011 :: 3 :: it would adversely affect the proper and smooth investigation of the case. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Application is dismissed. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/