IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD JULY 2008 / 1ST SRAVANA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 4464 of 2008() ----------------------------- CRIME NO. 189/2008 OF ERATTUPETTA POLICE STATION PETITIONER : ACCUSED:- ----------------- ABDUL KHADER, 58 YEARS, KANDATHIL HOUSE KALATHOOKADAVU PO., ERATTUPETTA VILLAGE KOTTAYAM BY ADV. SRI.M.V.BOSE SRI.VINOD MADHAVAN SMT.NISHA BOSE RESPONDENT: ------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 4464 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 23rd day of July, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. 2. According to the prosecution, 4568 k.gms. of rice was seized from the flour mill run by the petitioner alleging that the article is meant for distribution, as an essential commodity, through the ration shops to the public. The seizure was effected by the Taluk Supply Officer under instruction from the District Collector. The seized articles were released to the A.W.D. No.37 for distribution through the ration shops. The article was caused to be analyzed by the Quality Controller of F.C.I. and report was also obtained. Thereafter, a crime was registered as Crime No.189/2008 against the petitioner alleging contravention of clause 5(a) of the Kerala Rationing Order, 1966 read with sections 3 and 7 of the Essential Commodities Act. The crime was registered on 13-5-2008. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is absolutely innocent of the allegations made. The rice seized from the petitioner's premises is not intended to be supplied through the Authorized Wholesale Dealers or Authorized Retail Dealers (A.W.D. or A.R.D.). The BA 4464/08 -2- articles were seized only because the bags contained stencil mark of Food Corporation of India. From the Food Corporation of India, normally rice is supplied in bags containing 50 k.gm. per bag. The article seized from the petitioner's premises weighed 60 k.gm. per bag. He referred to Annexure -VII, which is a certificate issued by the Area Manager of the F.C.I. stating that the food grains handled by FCI are supposed to be packed in 50 kg. (approx) jute gunnies when procured. Annexure-VII(a), which is a letter issued from the F.C.I. to the District Supply Officer referring to the rice packed in bags containing stencil marks of F.C.I. reveals that similar gunnies and similar variety/quality rice are available in the open market as well. This observation was made in connection with another case of similar nature. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner also relies upon the observations of the District Collector in a proceeding in respect of another similar case. It was observed by the district Collector that “though the bags found to be machine stitches and stenciling of FCI is seen the seized bags, according to the statement of District Manager, FCI, the bags having stenciling of FCI is freely available in the open market.” It is also pointed out that in this case itself, after examination of the article by the Quality Controller of F.C.I., it is observed that “it BA 4464/08 -3- cannot be conclusively inferred that the stock belongs to FCI even though the gunnies are marked with FCI/FCI agencies stenciling and also the similar variety rice is available in the open market.” In the light of the above observations, it is strongly contended that the petitioner cannot be proceeded against for the violation of the provisions, under which the crime is registered. It is also contended that there is an inordinate delay of one year in registering the crime and hence petitioner may be granted anticipatory bail. 5. This application is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the Taluk Supply Officer had conducted the search under the instruction of the District Collector and article was sent for analysis by the Quality Controller of FCI and it was based on his report that the crime was registered. It cannot be said at this stage that the article does not belong to F.C.I., it is submitted. 6. On hearing both sides and on perusal of Annexure-III it is clear that the Quality Controller of FCI after examining the article involved in this case observed that it cannot be conclusively inferred that the stock belongs to FCI. It is also seen from Annexure-VII that FCI bags normally contained 50 k.gms., but the article seized wherein bags 60 k.gms. It is also seen from the documents issued by the BA 4464/08 -4- authorities in the F.C.I. itself that the bags containing the stencil mark of FCI are available in the open market. 7. Taking all these into consideration it is only fit and proper to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner and hence the following order is passed:- 1) Petitioner shall surrender before the Investigating Officer within seven days from today and make himself available for interrogation. 2) Thereafter, in the event of his arrest, if any, he shall be released on bail on his executing a bond for Rs. 25,000/- with solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the arresting officer on condition that he will co-operate with the investigation and report before the Investigating Officer as and when directed. The application is allowed as above. K. HEMA, JUDGE. mn.