Ratheesh M.R vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 13952 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                    PRESENT
                     THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARIPAL
        TUESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 15TH ASHADHA, 1943
                         BAIL APPL. NO. 3902 OF 2021
 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CRMC 1056/2021 OF DISTRICT COURT &
                     SESSIONS COURT, ERNAKULAM, ERNAKULAM
PETITIONER:

            RATHEESH M.R.
            AGED 38 YEARS
            S/O.RENJI, MANGATTU (H), PINDIMANA VILLAGE, VETTAMPARA
            KARA, VETTAMPARA P.O., KOTHAMANGALAM.

            BY ADV PEEYUS A.KOTTAM



RESPONDENTS:

    1       STATE OF KERALA
            REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
            ERNAKULAM, COCHIN - 682 031.

    2       EXCISE INSPECTOR,
            EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, KOTHAMANGALAM (INVESTIGATING
            OFFICER IN CRIME NO.48/2021 OF THE EXCISE RANGE OFFICE,
            KOTHAMANGALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT) , PIN - 686691.


OTHER PRESENT:

            PP - SMT. SREEJA V.




     THIS     BAIL    APPLICATION   HAVING    COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
06.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 BAIL APPL. NO. 3902 OF 2021
                                      2

                                  ORDER

This is an application filed under Section 438 of the

Cr.P.C. The petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No. 48/2021 of

Kothamangalam Excise Range, registered alleging offence

punishable under Sections 8(1), 8 (2), 55(a) (b) (i) (g) and 67B of

the Abkari Act. The allegation is that, on 15.05.2021, when the

Excise officials went to the residence of the petitioner, the petitioner

ran away from the house leaving five litres of arrack near his house

and thus after seizing the item, the crime was registered. Now

apprehending arrest he has moved this Court.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that,

the item was seized from the forest area over which he has no

control. He was no where in the scene at the time of arrival of the

Excise Party, that he is a person having clean antecedents.

3. The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that

seeing the Excise party, the petitioner had left the house through the

hind door. Whatever it may be, no one has been arrested from the BAIL APPL. NO. 3902 OF 2021

spot and after seizing the item, the crime was registered.

4. Even though Section 41A of the Abkari Act stands

as an embargo in granting anticipatory bail, for two reasons, I am

inclined to grant him bail in the event of arrest. Firstly, Sec.41A

prima facie stands against granting bail in respect of offences

attacting sentences exceeding three years. Here, the statute does not

provide any statutory minimum substantive sentence for the offence

alleged. Secondly, the petitioner does not have any criminal

antecedents to his credit. Moreover, the contraband has already

been seized from the scene and by the custodial interrogation, the

prosecution is not going to get any advantage.

5. In the circumstances, the petitioner shall be at

liberty to surrender before the Investigating Officer within ten days

from today and will make himself available for interrogation; in the

event of arrest, he shall be released on bail on executing bond for

Rs.50,000/- (fifty thousand rupees only) with two solvent sureties

each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer;

he shall co-operate with the investigation, shall not try to contact or BAIL APPL. NO. 3902 OF 2021

influence the witnesses or tamper evidence and shall not involve in

any crime during the period on bail.

Bail application is allowed as above.

Sd/-

K.HARIPAL JUDGE RMV/06/07/2021