IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 29TH AUGUST 2011 / 7TH BHADRA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 6992 of 2011() ----------------------------- CRIME NO.16/2010 OF KUTTANADU EXCISE RANGE PETITIONER/ACCUSED ---------------------- THANKAMMA SADANANDAN, AGED 74 YEARS, KIZHAKKEPARAMBIL VEEDU, VELIYANADU VILLAGE, VELIYANADU MURI. BY ADV. SRI.UNNI. K.K. (EZHUMATTOOR) RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. EXCISE INSPECTOR, KUTTANADU EXCISE RANGE OFFICE. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.MANU THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/08/2011, ALONG WITH BA NO. 6993 OF 2011 BA NO. 6994 OF 2011 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ----------------------------------------------------------- Bail Appln.Nos.6992, 6993 & 6994 of 2011 ------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of August, 2011 ORDER These Bail Applications are filed by Thankamma Sadanandan, who is an accused in C.R.Nos.16 of 2010, 3 of 2010 and 24 of 2010 of Kuttanadu Excise Range. Bail Applications are filed for the anticipatory bail, under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under Section 55(g) of the Abkari Act. It is alleged that the petitioner was found in possession of Wash intended for distillation to manufacture illicit arrack. It is submitted that the petitioner is a widow aged 74 years. It is stated that she is suffering from cardiac ailments and diabetes. Her son died and it is stated that her daughter-in-law is now a mentally challenged person. It is also submitted that the petitioner has to maintain her grandchildren aged 14 and 11 years. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the cases were foisted against her at the instance of one Bail Appln.Nos.6992, 6993 & 6994/2011 : 2 : Rajappan, who is a distant relative of the petitioner. Rajappan is a Preventive Officer in the Excise Department. Wife's house of Rajappan is near the house of the petitioner. There is dispute between petitioner on one hand and Rajappan's wife's sister on the other. It is submitted that abusing the official position, at Rajappan's instance, the O.Rs. were registered. The learned Counsel for the petitioner also submitted that all the three cases were registered within a short span of less than three months and at no point of time earlier any crime was registered against the petitioner. According to the counsel this would lead to the conclusion that the crimes were registered against the petitioner one after the other at the instance of Rajappan. 3. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is grave in nature. In a case of this nature, it is not proper to exercise the discretion to grant anticipatory bail. If anticipatory bail is granted, it would adversely affect the proper investigation of the case. The gender, age, ill-health and the family background of the accused and the other circumstances would be relevant, while considering the application for bail under Section 437 or 439 of the Code of Bail Appln.Nos.6992, 6993 & 6994/2011 : 3 : Criminal Procedure. Those circumstances cannot be, as such, grounds for granting anticipatory bail. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Applications are dismissed. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE skj