IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 9TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 20TH MAGHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 6386 of 2009() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.45/2009 OF KUNNAMANGALAM EXCISE RANGE PETITIONER/ACCUSED : --------------------------------- NALINI, W/O.SUBRAMANIAN, PATTARTHODIKAYIL HOUSE, NEELESWARAM AMSOM, KOZHIKODE TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT/STATE ------------------------------------------------------ 1. THE RANGE OFFICER, KUNNAMANGALAM EXCISE RANGE. 2. STATE REP; BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.6386 of 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of February, 2010 ORDER When the Bail Application came up for hearing on 27.1.2010, the following order was passed: “This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.45 of 2009 of Kunnamangalam Excise Range. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section 8(1) &(2) of the Abkari Act. 3. The prosecution case is that on 22.9.2009, the petitioner was found in possession of 5 litres of arrack. The petitioner could not be arrested as no woman police constable was available. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner produced for perusal a medical certificate which shows that the son of the petitioner was admitted in the hospital on 20.9.2009. It is stated that he is suffering from intracranial tumour and he is paralysed. 5. Taking into account the facts and BA No.6386/2009 2 circumstances of the case, I am of the view that before disposing of the Bail Application, an opportunity should be given to the petitioner to appear before the investigating officer. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the petitioner to appear before the investigating officer at 9 A.M. on 2.2.2010 and 3.2.2010. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the order before the investigating officer. Post on 9.2.2010. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner will not be arrested until further orders in connection with Crime No.45 of 2009 of Kunnamangalam Excise Range.” 2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Public Prosecutor that the direction contained in the order dated 27.1.2010 has been complied with by the petitioner. 3. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and also taking note of the fact that the direction in the order dated 27.1.2010 has been complied with by the petitioner, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. BA No.6386/2009 3 There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioner, the officer in charge of the police station shall release her on bail on her executing bond for Rs.15,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: a) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; b) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence; c) The petitioner shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail; d) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled. The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated above. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE csl BA No.6386/2009 4 K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- B.A.No.6386 of 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of January, 2010 ORDER This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the accused in Crime No.45 of 2009 of Kunnamangalam Excise Range. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section 8(1) &(2) of the Abkari Act. 3. The prosecution case is that on 22.9.2009, the petitioner was found in possession of 5 litres of arrack. The petitioner could not be arrested as no woman police constable was available. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner produced for perusal a medical certificate which shows that the son of the petitioner was admitted in the hospital on 20.9.2009. It is stated that he is suffering from intracranial tumour and he is paralysed. BA No.6386/2009 5 Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that before disposing of the Bail Application, an opportunity should be given to the petitioner to appear before the investigating officer. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the petitioner to appear before the investigating officer at 9 A.M. on 2.2.2010 and 3.2.2010. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the order before the investigating officer. Post on 9.2.2010. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner will not be arrested until further orders in connection with Crime No.45 of 2009 of Kunnamangalam Excise Range. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE csl Hand over copy to both sides. BA No.6386/2009 6