IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 17TH JULY 2009 / 26TH ASHADHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 3888 of 2009() -------------------------------------- CRIME NO.528/2009 OF ATTINGAL POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PETITIONER/ ACCUSED: --------------------------------------- ASHOK KUMAR, S/O.ACHUTHAN, POOVANATHUMVILAKAM, AZHOOR, PERUNGUZHI, CHIRAYINKIL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.LIJU. M.P SRI.SABEER.A. RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: ------------------------------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ATTINGAL POLICE STATION, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. SRI. I.V. PRAMOD, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No.3888 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 17th day of July, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the first accused in Crime No.528/2009 of Attingal Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 3 and 7(1)(a)(1) of the Essential Commodities Act. 3. On getting information that ration articles are being unauthorisedly transported through Chirayinkil–Attingal road, the police party intercepted the lorry bearing registration No. KL-05-Z-7737. Apart from the driver, another person, namely, Vasudevan was also there in the lorry. They stated that ration articles were being taken from the godown belonging to the petitioner, who is an authorised ration dealer and that the articles were intended to be delivered to Ushus Traders at Kottayam. The lorry was seized and the driver and Vasudevan were arrested. The petitioner apprehends his B.A. No.3888/2009 Page numbers arrest and therefore, this Bail Application is filed. 4. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence and allegations made against the petitioner, I do not think that the petitioner is entitled to get the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE scm