Kerala High Court
Ganesh vs State Of Kerala on 29 September, 2025
Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas
Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas
2025:KER:73101
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
MONDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025 / 7TH ASWINA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 11879 OF 2025
CRIME NO.129/2025 OF KASARAGOD EXCISE RANGE OFFICE,
KASARGOD AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN CR NO.129 OF 2025 OF
JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS, KASARAGOD.
PETITIONER:
GANESH.,
AGED 46 YEARS,
C/O SEENA, A R CAMP ROAD, PARAKATTA, R.D NAGAR,
P.O KUDLU KASARAGOD, PIN - 671 124.
BY ADVS.
SHRI.P.RAKESH THAMBAN
SHRI.ARUN P.
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
PIN - 682 031.
SMT. SREEJA V., PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
29.09.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Bail Appl. No.11879 of 2025
2025:KER:73101
-2-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS., J
--------------------------------------
Bail Appl. No.11879 of 2025
------------------------------------
Dated this the 29th day of September, 2025
ORDER
This bail application is filed under section 482 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short 'BNSS').
2. Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.129 of 2025 of
Kasaragod Excise Range Office registered for the offences punishable
under sections 55(i), 58 and 67B of the Abkari Act, 1077.
3. According to the prosecution, on 07.08.2025, petitioner
was found in possession of 25.92 litres of Indian Made Foreign Liquor
(for short 'IMFL') and thereby committed the offences alleged.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as
the learned Public Prosecutor.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that
petitioner has been falsely arrayed as an accused and that he has no
involvement in the alleged crime
6. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the bail
application and submitted that his custodial interrogation is
necessary.
2025:KER:73101
7. The possession of an excess quantity of IMFL is an
offence under Section 63 of the Act, which is a bailable offence.
However, petitioner is alleged to have committed the offence under
Sections 55(i) and 58 of the Act. Though prima facie, there are no
materials to indicate the commission of an offence under Section 55(i)
of the Abkari Act, that is a matter to be identified during the course of
investigation. However, since prima facie, I am of the view that only
Section 63 of the Abkari Act would be attracted, the rigour under
Section 41A of the Act has no application. Is such circumstances,
petitioner can be protected with an order of pre-arrest bail subject to
conditions.
8. In Ashok Kumar v. Union Territory of Chandigarh,
[2024 SCC OnLine SC 274], it has been held that a mere assertion on
the part of the State while opposing the plea for anticipatory bail that
custodial interrogation is required would not be sufficient and that
the State would have to show or indicate more than prima facie case
as to why custodial interrogation of the accused is required for the
purpose of investigation.
9. In the instant case, the State has not been able to
convince this Court that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is
necessary. On a consideration of the circumstances arising in the
case, this Court is of the view that though the allegations are serious
2025:KER:73101
in nature, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required and
he can be released on pre-arrest bail.
Accordingly, this application is allowed on the following
conditions:
(a) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer
on 16.10.2025 and shall subject himself to interrogation.
(b) If after interrogation, the Investigating Officer proposes
to arrest the petitioner, then, he shall be released on bail on
him executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand
only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum before
the Investigating Officer.
(c) Petitioner shall appear before the Investigating Officer
as and when required and shall also co-operate with the
investigation.
(d) Petitioner shall not intimidate or attempt to influence the
witnesses; nor shall he tamper with the evidence.
(e) Petitioner shall not commit any similar offences while he
is on bail.
In case of violation of any of the above conditions or if any
modification or deletion of the conditions are required, the
jurisdictional Court shall be empowered to consider such
applications, if any, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with
law, notwithstanding the bail having been granted by this Court.
Sd/-
BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
JUDGE
ADS
2025:KER:73101
APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 11879/2025
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SENT BY
THE PETITIONER TO THE COMMISSIONER OF
EXCISE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED
19.08.2025.
Annexure A2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPT DATED
21.08.2025.
Annexure A3 TRUE COPY OF THE DISMISSAL ORDER IN
CRL.MC.1325/2025 DATED 08.09.2025 ON THE
FILE OF SESSIONS COURT KASARAGOD.
