IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 30TH OCTOBER 2007 / 8TH KARTHIKA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 6480 of 2007() ----------------------------------------- (CRIME NO.44 OF 2007 OF AGALI EXCISE RANGE) PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------ RAJU, S/O. VASU, KANDATHILPARAMBIL VEEDU, MUKKALI, MANNARKADU. BY ADV. SRI.MANSOOR.B.H. RESPONDENT: RESPONDENT-COMPLAINANT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- EXCISE INSPECTOR, AGALY EXCISE RANGE, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.U. NAZAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/10/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss R.BASANT, J. ---------------------- B.A.No.6480 of 2007 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of October 2007 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner faces allegations under the Kerala Abkari Act. On receipt of prior information about sale of illicit liquor in the house of the petitioner, the excise party had reached the scene of the crime. They could not recover anything from the house proper. The petitioner was not available in the house. His wife was available in the house. The excise party searched the premises. It was found that under the plantain tree in the compound 4 litres of illicit arrack was available. The wife of the petitioner was questioned. It was revealed to the police that it was the petitioner who was keeping possession of the contraband articles and indulging in illicit sale of liquor at his house. Crime has been registered. Investigation is in progress. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is absolutely innocent. He prays that directions under Section 438 Cr.p.C may be issued in favour of the petitioner. B.A.No.6480/07 2 3. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application and having considered all the relevant inputs, I find merit in the opposition by the learned Public Prosecutor. I find no features in this case which can justify the invocation of the discretion under Section 438 Cr.P.C. I agree with the learned Public Prosecutor that this is a fit case where the petitioner must appear before the investigating officer or the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail in the normal and ordinary course. 4. In the result, this petition is dismissed. Needless to say, if the petitioner surrenders before the investigating officer or the learned Magistrate and applies for bail, after giving sufficient prior notice to the Prosecutor in charge of the case, the learned Magistrate must proceed to pass appropriate orders on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) jsr // True Copy// PA to Judge B.A.No.6480/07 3 B.A.No.6480/07 4 R.BASANT, J. CRL.M.CNo. ORDER 21ST DAY OF MAY2007