IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.K.MOHANAN FRIDAY, THE 16TH APRIL 2010 / 26TH CHAITHRA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 1960 of 2010() ---------------------------------------- CRIME NO.51/2010 OF SASTHAMCOTTA EXCISE RANGE, KOLLAM ........... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED ------------------------- SHAJI GEORGE, S/O.JAMES, JOSE MANDIRAM VEEDU, ARINALLOOR MURI, THEVALAKKARA VILLAGE, KARUNAGAPPALLY TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.DILEEP RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.J.MOHAMMED ANSAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/04/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: tss V.K. MOHANAN, J. ---------------------------------------- Bail Application No.1960 of 2010 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of April, 2010 O R D E R This is an application for regular bail filed by the petitioner, who is 1st accused in Crime No. 51/2010 of Sasthamcotta Excise Range, Kollam, in which offences under Sections 55(i), 55D and 67(B) of the Kerala Abkari Act are involved. 2. The allegation against the petitioner is that, on 20.3.2010 at about 10.30 A.M. the Excise Inspector of Sasthamcotta and his party while on patrol duty found that the petitioner was in possession and transportation of 45 ltrs. of IMFL in an autorikshaw bearing Reg.No.KL-02- 2039 , for the purpose of sale for 2nd accused. The petitioner was arrested from spot and produced before the JFCM Court, Sasthamcotta on 20.3.2010 and he was remanded to Judicial Custody. 4. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner B.A.No.1960 of 2010 -:2:- and also the learned Public Prosecutor. 5. The petitioner is arrested only on 20.3.2010. The investigation in this case is in progress. Considering the nature of the offences involved in the case, I am not inclined to grant bail to the petitioner at this stage, especially since the release of the petitioner at this stage is likely to affect the investigation adversely and there is no guarantee that he would not influence the witnesses and interfere with the investigation. In the result, there is no merit in the petition for bail and accordingly, the same is dismissed. V.K.MOHANAN, JUDGE ami/