IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH JUNE 2010 / 26TH JYAISTHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 3596 of 2010() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.1/2006 OF EXCISE RANGE, KOLLAM. .................... (S): PETITIONER/IST ACCUSED (IN CUSTODY) ------------------------------------------------------- T.REGHU, S/O.THANKAPPAN, VISHUNU BHAVANAM, PALLICKAL DESAM, MYLAM VILLAGE, KOTTARAKARA TALUK, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.G.HARIHARAN SRI.PRAVEEN.H. SRI.V.RAVEENDRAN RESPONDENT(S): STATE AND COMPLAINANTS ------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE EXCISE INSPECTOR, KOLLAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ---------------------------------------------- Bail Application No.3596 of 2010 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 16th June, 2010. O R D E R This petition is for bail. 2. Petitioner is first accused in the crime. The alleged offence is under Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act. According to prosecution, on 29.1.2006 at about 8.30 p.m., petitioner along with 2nd accused was found carrying 34.1 Kg. of Ganja near Kollam Railway Station. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner was arrested after four years of the incident, on 27.3.2010 and he is in custody for the past 85 days. Petitioner is implicated on a mistaken identity. It is also submitted that Investigating Officer has falsely implicated petitioner, in view of a complaint given by petitioner's wife before the Minister (Annexure V). The complaint was given when there was an attempt to falsely implicate the petitioner, in the year 2005. Annexure V is dated 10.4.2005. Petitioner's mother died and his father is sick, as evidenced by Annexure IV. It is also submitted that the Investigating Officer against whom, Annexure V BA NO.3596/10 2 complaint was given is the same person, who is investigating this case and that is why petitioner is falsely implicated. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor pointed out that this is second application for bail. As per the records, petitioner has committed the offence, but he was absconding for a period of four years. He was in possession of commercial quantity of Ganja. It is also submitted that the officer who has detected the crime has mentioned the name of petitioner in the mahazar itself and it cannot be said that the Investigating Officer, against whom Annexure V complaint was given, falsely implicated petitioner. 5. On hearing both sides, I find that petitioner was not able to probabilise that there was false implication of petitioner. There is no reason why the contention raised by prosecution that petitioner was absconding, cannot be accepted. In the above circumstances, I find that if bail is granted at this stage, it is likely that he may not be available for trial. Hence, this petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. tgs