IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 15TH JANUARY 2008 / 25TH POUSHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 7988 of 2007() ----------------------------- CRMP.2325/2007 of DISTRICT COURT, PATHANAMTHITTA CRIME NO.27/2007 OF RANNI EXCISE RANGE .................... : PETITIONER/ACCUSED ----------------------------------- SREEDHARAN, S/O.LATE KRISHNAN, AGED 85, RESIDING AT PUTHIYATH HOUSE, MAKKAPPUZHA, CHETHAKKAL VILLAGE, RANNI TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.VIDYASAGAR SRI.P.CHANDY JOSEPH RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, KERALA. 2. EXCISE INSPECTOR RANNI RANGE. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.U.NAZER THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- B.A.No.7988 of 2007 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of January 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner, a person aged about 83 years faces allegations under the Kerala Abkari Act. 175 litres of spirit were found in a premises owned by the son of the petitioner, in the absence of the son who is employed abroad. The petitioner is allegedly looking after the properties of the son. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the building has been let out to the first accused by the son of the petitioner by executing a document. That document was executed by the petitioner herein on behalf of the son as his attorney. At any rate, the petitioner or his son was not in actual physical possession of the premises and the exclusive possession of the premises was with the first accused, it is argued. The learned counsel for the petitioner, in these circumstances, prays that the petitioner does not deserve to be arrested and incarcerated on these allegations. 3. The learned Public Prosecutor, after taking instructions, submits that the State has no objection in B.A.No.7988/07 2 anticipatory bail being granted to the petitioner now, it having been clarified in investigation that the petitioner is only the agent of the landlord and neither the landlord or the petitioner was in actual physical possession of the premises. 4. The learned Public Prosecutor submits that the petitioner is required now only for interrogation and the petitioner's presence is not required for arrest. The learned Public Prosecutor only submits that the petitioner may be directed to make himself available for questioning before the police. The learned counsel for the petitioner agrees that the petitioner shall make himself available for questioning as a witness on 28/01/2008. The said request is accepted and this petition is, in these circumstances, dismissed accepting the submission of the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioner shall not be arrested now. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr B.A.No.7988/07 3 B.A.No.7988/07 4 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.CNo. ORDER 21ST DAY OF MAY2007