IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 14TH JANUARY 2008 / 24TH POUSHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 122 of 2008() ---------------------------- CRIME NO. 44/07 OF BADIADKA EXCISE RANGE PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------ SREEJA, AGED 42 YEARS, W/O. VENU, RESIDING AT PERIYADUKKA,KASARAGOD DIST. BY ADV. SRI.KODOTH SREEDHARAN RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT: ------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, THROUGH EXCISE INSPECTOR BADIADKA RANGE, REP.BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. S.U. NAZAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 122 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 14th day of January, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner, a woman, faces allegations under the Kerala Abkari Act. The petitioner was allegedly found to be in possession of 5 litres of arrack on 22.12.2007. She was not arrested by the detecting officials as the detecting Excise party did not consist of any woman official. Investigation is in progress. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. The petitioner has no history of any criminal antecedents, submits the learned Prosecutor. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent. He prays that anticipatory bail may be granted to the petitioner. 3. The learned Prosecutor opposes the application. The allegations clearly reveal the commission of the crime. The petitioner may be directed to surrender before the learned Magistrate and seek regular bail in the ordinary course, submits the Prosecutor. B.A.No. 122 of 2008 2 4. I find merit in the opposition by the learned Prosecutor. I agree with the learned Prosecutor that there are no features in this case, which would justify the invocation of the extra ordinary equitable discretion under section 438 Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioner. This I am satisfied is a fit case where the petitioner must resort to the ordinary and normal procedure of appearing before the Investigator or the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail in the ordinary course. 6. This application is accordingly dismissed. I may however hasten to observe that if the petitioner appears before the learned Magistrate and applies for bail after giving sufficient prior notice to the Prosecutor in charge of the case, the learned Magistrate must proceed to pass orders on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. (R. BASANT) Judge tm