Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 5TH PHALGUNA, 1942 Bail Appl..No.1572 OF 2021 CRIME NO.59/2020 OF NEELESWARAM EXCISE RANGE OFFICE , Kasargod PETITIONER/S: UNNIKRISHNAN.T AGED 52 YEARS SON OF AMBU, RESIDING AT THALAKKATTU HOUSE, PAMPERINGARA DESAM, CHEEMENI VILLAGE, HOSDURG TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.A.ARUNKUMAR RESPONDENT/S: STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA R1 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR OTHER PRESENT: SMT.V.SREEJA -PP THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R
Dated this the 24th day of February 2021 APPLICATION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL The applicant is the sole accused in Crime No.59/2020 of Nileshwaram Excise Range for having allegedly committed offences punishable under Section 55(g) of the Abkari Act.
2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on
05-05-2020 at about 12.40 pm at Pamporingara in Cheemeni Village, 40 litres of wash was discovered stored in 2 barrels near the toilet of the house of the applicant. He was not available at the house and hence not apprehended. The applicant now apprehends arrest and has approached this Court for anticipatory bail. It is pointed out that the Excise
Officials have an axe to grind against him. The Excise Officials were politically at rivalry with the applicant and that is the reason why a false case has been foisted against him. In connection with this, the applicant's wife had also filed a complaint [Annexure-A(ii)] before the District Police Chief on 9.5.2020 and on the basis of the reply [Annexure-A(iii)] given by the District Police Chief, she preferred complaint before the Deputy Excise Commissioner of the Range as is evidenced by Annexure-A(iv). The applicant states that he has been implicated in a false case and therefore seeks pre-arrest bail. He has no criminal antecedents also.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned Public Prosecutor.
4. Whether the applicant has been implicated in a false case is a matter of evidence to be decided by the
trial court during trial. At present, there are no material to indicate that the applicant has been implicated in a false case. Hence, the defence set up by the applicant at this stage cannot be entertained. More over, in view of the embargo under Section 41A of the Abkari Act, and the decision of the Apex Court in Muraleedharan v. State of Kerala [2001 KHC 411], applicant is not entitled to a pre-arrest bail. The application is only to be dismissed.
5. The applicant is therefore, directed to
surrender before the Investigating Officer within two weeks. In the event of his being arrested, after interrogation, he shall be produced before the jurisdictional court, where he is at liberty to apply for regular bail, which shall be considered and preferably disposed of by the jurisdictional court on the very same day.
With these observations, the Bail Application is dismissed. Sd/- ASHOK MENON JUDGE jg