IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 3RD NOVEMBER 2008 / 12TH KARTHIKA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 6545 of 2008() ----------------------------- CR.NO.32/2008 OF CHITTAR EXCISE RANGE PETITIONER/IST ACCUSED ------------------------------------------ SOMARAJAN, EDAPRA PUTHEN VEETTIL, PERUNAD VILLAGE, RANNI TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.V.SETHUNATH RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT/ STATE --------------------------------- 1. THE EXCISE INSPECTOR, CHITTAR EXCISE RANGE. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. HEMA, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A. No. 6545 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 3rd day of November,2008 O R D E R Petition for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offence is under section 55(g) of the Abkari Act. According to prosecution, accused 1 and 2 were found in possession of 288 litres of wash. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that there is absolutely no evidence against petitioner. First accused was arrested from the spot and petitioner was falsely implicated in the crime. It is submitted that before questioning the witnesses in the mahazar itself, it is mentioned that petitioner is involved in the crime. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that petitioner is the 2nd accused and wash was recovered from the house of 1st accused. On questioning witnesses, it was revealed that wash was prepared by accused 1 and 2, who are son in law and father-in-law. Learned Public Prosecutor also submitted that at the time of preparing the seizure mahazar itself, witnesses were questioned and petitioner's involvement was revealed. BA 6545/08 -2- 5. On hearing both sides, considering the nature of allegations made, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to petitioner in an offence like this. Even bail under section 437 Cr.P.C. cannot be granted, unless court is satisfied of innocence of the accused. This petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. mn.