IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH JULY 2010 / 6TH SRAVANA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 1423 of 2010 CRIME NO.148 OF 2009 OF NOORANADU EXCISE RANGE, ALAPPUZHA PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.5: -------------------------------------- SANTHOSH, S/O.SADANANDAN, SANTHOSH BHAVANAM, THAMARAKULAM P.O., MAVELIKKARA. BY ADV. SRI.S.RAJEEV RESPONDENT: --------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM (CRIME NO.148 OF 2009 OF NOORANADU EXCISE RANGE). PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.T.T.MUHAMOOD THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NO. 1423 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 28th day of July, 2010 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.5 in Crime No.148 of 2009 of Nooranadu Excise Range, Alappuzha District. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section 55(a) of the Abkari Act. 3. The prosecution case is that on 20.12.2009 at about 5 AM, on a search conducted by the Circle Inspector of Excise in the workshop run by one Prasobhanan, they seized 5000 litres of toddy. It is alleged that toddy was mixed with spirit. Seven vehicles were seized from the premises of the workshop. It is alleged that the vehicles were intended to be used for transporting toddy to various places. 4. The petitioner was the registered owner of the mini lorry, bearing Registration No.KL-4E 4543. According to the petitioner, on B.A. NO.1423 OF 2010 :: 2 :: 13.8.2009, he had sold the vehicle to Kunhi Krishnan, who is accused No.6 in this case. 5. As per the order dated 11.3.2010, anticipatory bail was granted to accused No.1. 6. In this Bail Application, on 1.7.2010, a learned single Judge of this Court passed the following order: “Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner is the R.C owner of the vehicle involved, but it was sold to one Kunhi Krishnan, by virtue of Annexure-1 agreement and it was not in possession of petitioner at the time of offence. The bank guarantee given by the said Kunhi Krishnan, while the vehicle was released to petitioner. Petitioner is prepared to explain the relevant facts before the investigating officer, if he gets an opportunity. 2. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that petitioner was already questioned once, and there are materials and circumstances which would indicate that petitioner himself was in possession of the vehicle at the time of the offence. He also moved the court for release of the vehicle. Even a Writ Petition was filed by him. On B.A. NO.1423 OF 2010 :: 3 :: hearing both sides, I find that one more opportunity can be given to petitioner. Hence, the following order is passed: Petitioner shall report before the investigating officer on 07.07.2010 between 10 A.M and 1 P.M. and co-operate with the investigation. 3. Learned Public Prosecutor undertakes that petitioner will not be arrested. Undertaking is recorded. Post on 13.07.2010.” 7. It is submitted that the petitioner appeared before the investigating officer as directed by this Court. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that he co-operated with the investigation. However, it is added by the learned Public Prosecutor that continued investigation is required to verify the authenticity of the transfer of the vehicle by the petitioner to accused No.6. 8. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and also taking note of the fact that the petitioner has complied with the direction contained in the order dated 1.7.2010, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted B.A. NO.1423 OF 2010 :: 4 :: to the petitioner. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioner, the officer in charge of the police station shall release him on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.15,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: a) The petitioner shall report before the investigating officer between 9 AM and 11 AM on alternate Mondays, till the final report is filed or until further orders; b) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; c) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence; d) The petitioner shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail; and e) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled. The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated above. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/