IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT TUESDAY, THE 29TH JANUARY 2008 / 9TH MAGHA 1929 Bail Appl..No. 417 of 2008() ---------------------------- C.R.NO.1/08 OF CHITTAR EXCISE RANGE PETITIONER/ACCUSED --------------------------- RAMANAN,S/O.JANARDHANAN,OLICKAL VEEDU KADUMEEN CHIRA, ATHIKKAYAM VILLAGE, RANNI TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.V.SETHUNATH RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE EXCISE INSPECTOR,CHITTAR RANGE PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA ERNAKULAM. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. JAI GEORGE THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - B.A.No. 417 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 29th day of January, 2008 O R D E R Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner faces allegations under the Kerala Abkari Act. On 3.1.2008 he was allegedly carrying 1.95 litres of arrack. Seeing the Excise party, he allegedly abandoned the article and took to his heels. He could not be apprehended. The contemporaneous seizure mahazar and occurrence report do clearly reveal the complicity of the petitioner. Investigation is in progress. The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest. 2. According to the petitioner, the allegations are all false. No incident as alleged had taken place on 3.1.2008. On 1.1.2008 there was some earlier incident and the Excise party, on account of ill-will arising out of that incident, has falsely implicated the petitioner in the incident on 3.1.2008. The petitioner does not deserve to endure the trauma of arrest and detention. He may be granted anticipatory bail, prays the learned counsel. B.A.No. 417 of 2008 2 3. The learned Prosecutor opposes the application. Allegations are all correct. Investigation so far conducted confirms the allegations against the petitioner. The contemporaneous seizure mahazar and occurrence report reveal the complicity of the petitioner beyond doubt. At any rate, at the moment there is no material on the basis of which this Court can entertain the satisfaction that the allegations are raised falsely and with vexatious intent. He may be directed to surrender before the Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate and then seek regular bail in the ordinary course, submits the Prosecutor. 4. I have considered all the relevant inputs. I find merit in the opposition by the learned Prosecutor. I am unable to perceive 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. This I am satisfied 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. B.A.No. 417 of 2008 3 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 Magistrate must proceed to pass orders on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously. (R. BASANT) Judge tm