IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH MARCH 2008 / 29TH PHALGUNA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 1744 of 2008() ----------------------------- CR NO.13/08 OF AMARAVILA EXCISE RANGE CMP.2005/2008 of J.M.F.C.-II,NEYYATTINKARA .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------ CHANDRABABU, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O. VARGHESE, ASWATHY BHAVAN,NADEERKOLLA DESOM, KOLLAYIL VILLAGE, NEYYATTINKARA TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.T.A.UNNIKRISHNAN SRI.K.SATHEESH KUMAR RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT: ------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, 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 19/03/2008, A/W. BA 1745 OF 2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.Nos. 1744 & 1745 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 19th day of March, 2008 O R D E R These applications are for regular bail. The petitioner faces allegations in both these crimes for the offence punishable under the Kerala Abkari Act. He was allegedly found to be in possession of 4 litres of arrack on 10.1.2008 and 1 litre of arrack on 12.2.2008. The petitioner was arrested on 12.2.2008 in both the cases and he continues in custody from that date. The learned Prosecutor submits that the petitioner is involved in as many as eight other crimes also registered under the Kerala Abkari Act against him. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner prays that the petitioner may be granted regular bail in these two cases. 3. The learned Prosecutor vehemently opposes the applications. Considering the antecedents of the petitioner, the State is obliged to oppose the application, submits the Prosecutor. B.A.Nos. 1744 & 1745 of 2008 2 4. I reckon the said objection to be justified. In the wake of opposition by the Public Prosecutor regular bail can be granted to the petitioner only if this court is in a position to entertain both the satisfactions contemplated under Section 41A of the Kerala Abkari Act. At the moment and with the available inputs, I am unable to entertain either of those satisfactions in these two cases. The petitioner's prayer for regular bail must hence fail. 5. These applications are, in these circumstance, dismissed. But I may hasten to observe that the petitioner shall be at liberty to move the court for bail again at a later stage of the investigation, not at any rate, prior to 2.4.2008. The Investigators shall, in the meantime, make every endeavour to complete the investigation. (R. BASANT) Judge tm