IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR FRIDAY, THE 21ST JANUARY 2011 / 1ST MAGHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 392 of 2011() ---------------------------- CMP.220/2011 of J.M.F.C.-I,NEDUMANGAD .................... (CR.NO.48/2010 OF VAMANAPURAM EXCISE RANGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM) ........ PETITIONER/ACCUSED (IN CUSTODY): ----------------------------------------------------------- NUJOOM, S/O.MUHAMMED HANEEF, KLLUVILA VEEDU, KOCHANA, BLOCK NO.33, BHARTHANOOR, PANGODU VILLAGE, NEDUMANGAD. BY ADV. SRI.A.RAJASIMHAN RESPONDENT(S): INVESTIGATING OFFICER: ------------------------------------------------------------------- EXCISE INSPECTOR, VAMANAPURAM EXCISE RANGE, THIRUVANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. M.S. BREEZ THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss V. RAMKUMAR, J. --------------------------------------------------- Bail Application No.392 of 2011 --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of January, 2011 ORDER In this Petition filed under Sec.439 Cr.P.C. the petitioner who is the sole accused in C.R.No.48 of 2010 of Vamanapuram Excise Range for offences punishable under Sections 58, 8(1) & 8(2) of the Abkari Act for allegedly having been found in possession of 4 litres of coloured arrack, seeks his enlargement on bail. The petitioner was arrested on 10/01/2011. 2. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. 3. It is too early to accept the petitioner's contention that he has been falsely implicated in the case. Moreover, I am not satisfied that both the grounds enumerated under Sec.41A (b)(ii) of the Abkari Act are present in this case so as to justify his release on bail. With the above observation this Application is dismissed. V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE skj