Kerala High Court
Santhosha K vs The Excise Inspector on 10 February, 2025
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
2025:KER:10416
Bail Appl. Nos.1565 & 1569 OF 2025
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
MONDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025 / 21ST MAGHA, 1946
BAIL APPL. NO. 1565 OF 2025
CRIME NO.5/2025 OF Kumbala Excise Range Office, Kasargod
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CMP NO.126 OF
2025 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS ,KASARAGOD
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
SANTHOSHA K
AGED 35 YEARS
S/O. LATE BABU AYITHA, KANYALATHADUKKA DESOM,
BAYAR VILLAGE, MANJESHWARAM TALUK, KASARAGODE,
PIN - 671323
BY ADVS. T.G.RAJENDRAN
T.R.TARIN
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT & STATE:
1 THE EXCISE INSPECTOR
KUMBLA EXCISE RANGE, KASARAGODE, PIN - 671321
2 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF
KERALA, PIN - 682031
SRI NOUSHAD KA, SR PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
10.02.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..1569/2025, THE COURT ON
THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:10416
Bail Appl. Nos.1565 & 1569 OF 2025
2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
MONDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2025 / 21ST MAGHA, 1946
BAIL APPL. NO. 1569 OF 2025
CRIME NO.107/2023 OF Kumbala Excise Range Office, Kasargod
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED IN CMP NO.309 OF
2025 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS ,KASARAGOD
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
SANTHOSHA .K
AGED 35 YEARS
S/O. LATE BABU AYITHA, KANYALATHADUKKA DESOM,
BAYAR VILLAGE, MANJESHWARAM TALUK, KASARAGODE,
PIN - 671323
BY ADVS. T.G.RAJENDRAN
T.R.TARIN
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT AND STATE:
1 THE EXCISE INSPECTOR
KUMBLA EXCISE RANGE, KASARAGODE, PIN - 671321
2 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, PIN - 682031
SRI NOUSHAD KA, SR PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
10.02.2025, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..1565/2025, THE COURT ON
THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2025:KER:10416
Bail Appl. Nos.1565 & 1569 OF 2025
3
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
--------------------------------
B.A. Nos.1565 & 1569 of 2025
----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 10th day of February, 2025
ORDER
These Bail Applications, which are filed under Section
483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, are filed by the
same person, and therefore, I am disposing these bail
applications by a common order.
2. Petitioner is an accused in Crime No.5/2025 of
Kumbala Excise Range and also in Crime No.107/2023 of
Kumbala Excise Range. The above cases are registered
alleging offences punishable under Section 58 of the Abkari Act.
3. The prosecution case is that the accused was
found in possession of Indian Made Foreign Liquor exclusively
meant for sale in the State of Karnataka. The petitioner was
arrested in Crime No.5/2025 on 09.01.2025 and thereafter his
arrest was recorded in Crime No.107/2023 also.
4. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the Public
Prosecutor.
2025:KER:10416
Bail Appl. Nos.1565 & 1569 OF 2025
5. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that
the petitioner is in custody from 09.01.2025 and the petitioner is
ready to abide any conditions if this Court grant him bail. The
Public Prosecutor opposed the bail application and submitted
that the petitioner is involved in five other cases with similar
allegations.
6. This Court considered the contentions of the
petitioner and the Public Prosecutor. It is true that the
allegation against the petitioner is serious. The petitioner has
criminal antecedents also. The allegation against the petitioner
is that he was found in possession of Indian Made Foreign
Liquor which is meant for sale in the State of Karnataka.
Considering the fact that the petitioner is in custody from
09.01.2025, I think the petitioner can be released on bail on
condition that if the petitioner is involved in similar offence in
future, the Investigating Officer in these cases is free to file
appropriate application for cancellation of bail and if such an
application is received, the jurisdictional court can pass
appropriate orders in that application even though this order is
passed by this Court.
2025:KER:10416
Bail Appl. Nos.1565 & 1569 OF 2025
7. Moreover, it is a well accepted principle that
the bail is the rule and the jail is the exception. The Hon'ble
Supreme Court in Chidambaram. P v Directorate of
Enforcement [2019 (16) SCALE 870], after considering all
the earlier judgments, observed that, the basic jurisprudence
relating to bail remains the same inasmuch as the grant of bail
is the rule and refusal is the exception so as to ensure that the
accused has the opportunity of securing fair trial.
8. Moreover, in Jalaluddin Khan v. Union of
India [2024 KHC 6431], the Hon'ble Supreme Court observed
that:
"21. Before we part with the Judgment, we must
mention here that the Special Court and the
High Court did not consider the material in the
charge sheet objectively. Perhaps the focus was
more on the activities of PFI, and therefore, the
appellant's case could not be properly
appreciated. When a case is made out for a
grant of bail, the Courts should not have any
hesitation in granting bail. The allegations of the
prosecution may be very serious. But, the duty
of the Courts is to consider the case for grant of
bail in accordance with the law. "Bail is the rule
and jail is an exception" is a settled law. Even in
2025:KER:10416
Bail Appl. Nos.1565 & 1569 OF 2025
a case like the present case where there are
stringent conditions for the grant of bail in the
relevant statutes, the same rule holds good with
only modification that the bail can be granted if
the conditions in the statute are satisfied. The
rule also means that once a case is made out for
the grant of bail, the Court cannot decline to
grant bail. If the Courts start denying bail in
deserving cases, it will be a violation of the
rights guaranteed under Art.21 of our
Constitution." (underline supplied)
9. In Manish Sisodia v. Directorate of
Enforcement [2024 KHC 6426], also the Hon'ble Supreme
Court observed that:
"53. The Court further observed that, over a
period of time, the trial courts and the High
Courts have forgotten a very well - settled
principle of law that bail is not to be withheld as a
punishment. From our experience, we can say
that it appears that the trial courts and the High
Courts attempt to play safe in matters of grant of
bail. The principle that bail is a rule and refusal is
an exception is, at times, followed in breach. On
account of non - grant of bail even in straight
forward open and shut cases, this Court is flooded
with huge number of bail petitions thereby adding
2025:KER:10416
Bail Appl. Nos.1565 & 1569 OF 2025
to the huge pendency. It is high time that the trial
courts and the High Courts should recognize the
principle that "bail is rule and jail is exception"."
10. Considering the dictum laid down in the above
decision and considering the facts and circumstances of this
case, these Bail Applications are allowed with the following
directions:
1. Petitioner shall be released on bail on
executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees
Fifty Thousand only) with two solvent
sureties each for the like sum to the
satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.
2. The petitioner shall appear before the
Investigating Officer for interrogation as
and when required. The petitioner shall co-
operate with the investigation and shall not,
directly or indirectly make any inducement,
threat or promise to any person acquainted
with the facts of the case so as to dissuade
him/her from disclosing such facts to the
2025:KER:10416
Bail Appl. Nos.1565 & 1569 OF 2025
Court or to any police officer.
3. Petitioner shall not leave India without
permission of the jurisdictional Court.
4. Petitioner shall not commit an offence
similar to the offence of which he is
accused, or suspected, of the commission of
which he is suspected.
5. If any of the above conditions are violated
by the petitioner, the jurisdictional Court
can cancel the bail in accordance to law,
even though the bail is granted by this
Court. The prosecution and the victim are at
liberty to approach the jurisdictional court
to cancel the bail, if there is any violation of
the above conditions.
sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JUDGE
jv
