IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI TUESDAY, THE 11TH MAY 2010 / 21ST VAISAKHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 2690 of 2010() ----------------------------- CMP.1256/2010 of J.M.F.C.,PEERUMEDU .................... (CR.NO.24/10 OF EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, PEERMADE, IDUKKI DISTRICT) ....... PETITIONER/ACCUSED: -------------------------------------- EASWARAN, S/O.MADASWAMI, PAVANAMAL BHAVAN,KOTTAMALA 2ND DIVISION, VAGAMON VILLAGE, PEERMADE TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.BIJU .C. ABRAHAM RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT: ----------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE EXCISE INSPECTOR, EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, PEERMADE,IDUKKI DISTRICT,THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. I.V. PRAMOD THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss P.Q. BARKATH ALI, J. ================ B.A. No. 2690 of 2010 ================ Dated this the 11th day of May, 2010 O R D E R This is a bail application filed by the accused in Crime No. 24 of 2010 of Excise Range Office, Peermade, Idukki District under section 439 of Cr.P.C. 2. The allegation against the petitioner is that on April 25, 2010 at 11.30 PM he was found in possession of 800 ml of illicit arrack at 2nd Division of Kottamala Estate in Vagamon Village and that thereby committed offence punishable under sections 8(1) & (2) of the Abkari Act. He was arrested on the spot and is in remand thereafter. The Judicial Magistrate of the First Class I, Peermade rejected his bail application. 3. It is alleged in the petition that the petitioner is innocent of the offence alleged against him, that he is B.A. No. 2690 of 2010 -2- falsely implicated in this case and that therefore he may be released on bail. 4. Notice given to the learned Public Prosecutor. This petition is not seriously opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. 6. For the following reasons, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner. The petitioner is in remand from April 25, 2010 onwards. Further he was found in possession of only 800 ml of illicit arrack. The Public Prosecutor submitted that if the bail is granted to the petitioner it must be only on stringent conditions. No other similar cases are pending against the petitioner. Therefore I feel that the petitioner can be released on bail subject to conditions. 7. In the result, the petition is allowed. The petitioner shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand only) with two B.A. No. 2690 of 2010 -3- solvent sureties for like sum each to the satisfaction of the lower court on the following conditions:- 1) The petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer on all Mondays between 9 AM and 11 AM. 2) The petitioner shall not commit similar offence while on bail. 3) The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation and shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence. 4) Petitioner shall not leave the limits of the jurisdiction of the lower court without prior permission. 5) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, lower court can cancel his bail. P.Q. BARKATH ALI, JUDGE. jvt