IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 19TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 30TH MAGHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 965 of 2008() ---------------------------- CRIME NO,. 265/07 OF ALAKKODE POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONER --------------------------- VALIKKAL OMANA AGED 55 YEARS, RESIDING AT PALAMAVU, CHITTADI, AMSOM AND DESOM,THALIPARAMBU TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.M.ANEESH RESPONDENTS: ------------- THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. JAI GEORGE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 965 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 19th day of February, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner, a woman, faces allegations under the Kerala Abkari Act. She was allegedly found to keep in her possession 2.5 litres of arrack when the police party intercepted her on 5.1.2008. She allegedly abandoned the article and took to her heels. There was no woman official in the detecting party and hence the detecting party could not apprehend and arrest the petitioner. Investigation is in progress. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. The learned Prosecutor reports that the petitioner has no history of any criminal antecedents. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent. It is prayed that directions under Section 438 cr.P.C. may be issued in favour of the petitioner. B.A.No. 965 of 2008 2 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. 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. The contemporaneous seizure mahazar and the F.I.R. do reveal the involvement of the petitioner. This, I agree with the learned Prosecutor, 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 B.A.No. 965 of 2008 3 Magistrate must proceed to pass orders on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. (R. BASANT) Judge tm