IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT FRIDAY, THE 1ST FEBRUARY 2008 / 12TH MAGHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 571 of 2008() ---------------------------- CR 12/08 OF KARUNAGAPPALLY EXCISE RANGE PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------ THANKACHI, AGED 48 YEARS, D/O. GOURIKKUTTY, BINU BHAVANAM, KLAPPANA P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.PRASAD SRI.ABHILASH S.FRANCIS RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT: ------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE EXCISE OFFICER,KARUNAGAPPALLY EXCISE RANGE, KOLLAM THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. JAI GEORGE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 571 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 1st day of February, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner, a woman, faces allegations under the Kerala Abkari Act. The petitioner was allegedly found to keep in her possession in her house 70 litres of wash on 12.1.2008. She was intercepted. Seizure was effected. But as the detecting Excise Party did not consist of any woman police officials, she was not arrested. Investigation is in progress. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent. She was not responsible for the articles in the house. In any view of the matter, the petitioner, aged about 49 years and a widow, may be granted anticipatory bail, it is prayed. 3. The learned Prosecutor opposes the application. He submits that the petitioner may be directed to appear before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail in the ordinary course. B.A.No. 571 of 2008 2 4. I have considered all the relevant inputs. I find merit in the opposition by the learned Prosecutor. I am unable to find any features in this case, which would justify the invocation of the extra ordinary equitable discretion under section 438 Cr.P.C. in favour of the petitioner. This I am satisfied is a fit case where the petitioner must resort to the ordinary and normal procedure of appearing before the Investigator or the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail in the ordinary course. 5. This application is accordingly dismissed. I may however hasten to observe that if the petitioner appears before the learned Magistrate and applies for bail after giving sufficient prior notice to the Prosecutor in charge of the case, the learned Magistrate must proceed to pass orders on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. (R. BASANT) tm Judge B.A.No. 571 of 2008 3