IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 20TH JULY 2009 / 29TH ASHADHA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 3927 of 2009 CR. NO.24 OF 2009 OF THE KUNNAMANGALAM EXCISE RANGE CMC.878/2009 SESSIONS COURT, KOZHIKODE PETITIONER/2ND ACCUSED ------------------------------------------ RAVEENDRAN, S/O.NANU VYDYAR, PUNCHARATH HOUSE, POST KALLURUTTY, NEELESWARAM, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.K.A.SALIL NARAYANAN RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NO. 3927 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 20th July, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.2 in Crime No.24 of 2009 of the Kunnamangalam Excise Range. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under Sections 8(1) and (2) of the Abkari Act. 3. The prosecution case is that on 25.6.2009, the excise party saw the first accused pouring something from a can to another can in the hands of the second accused. On approaching them, it was realised that from the ten litre can in the possession of the first accused, liquor was being poured into the five litre can in the possession of the second accused. It was realised that it was arrack. While the mahazar was being written, the second accused ran away. The first accused was arrested and he was released on bail. 4. The case of the petitioner is that about six months' back, the guards of Kunnamangalam Excise Range had assaulted him in front of his B.A. NO. 3927 OF 2009 :: 2 :: wife. The petitioner had complained to the police. Both parties were called to the police station. It was assured by the excise guards that such incidents would not be repeated. According to the petitioner, the present case is foisted against him only due to the grudge towards him on account of reporting of the previous incident to the police. 5. I have gone through the case diary. Apart from the mahazar and the report, no other investigation seems to have been made. No statement of any independent witness is seen in the case diary. Prima facie, it cannot be stated that the apprehension of the petitioner is not genuine, in the facts and circumstances as alleged by him. 6. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and other circumstances, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioner. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioner, the officer in charge of the police station shall release him on bail on his executing bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: a) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; B.A. NO. 3927 OF 2009 :: 3 :: b) The petitioner shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence; c) The petitioner shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail; d) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled. The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated above. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/