Full Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARIPAL FRIDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 8TH SRAVANA, 1943 BAIL APPL. NO. 5333 OF 2021 IN CRIME NO.67/2021 OF KUTTANAD EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, ALAPPUZHA. PETITIONER/ACCUSED: VINOD AGED 45 YEARS S/O.PATHMANABHAN, KULANGARA HOUSE, WARD 4, KAINAKARY PANCHAYATH, KUTTAMANGALAM - 688 501, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADVS. MANU HARSHAKUMAR SREEJESH B PANICKER SAMEER.P.A MARY ANN SAJI RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT: 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI - 682 031. 2 EXCISE INSPECTOR, KUTTANAD EXCISE RANGE, ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688 001, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR. SR.PP - SRI. SANTHOSH PETER THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The sole accused in Crime No.67/2021 of Kuttanadu Excise Range seeks his pre-arrest bail.
2. The crime was registered on 19.06.2021at 12.15 p.m, after
seizing 35 litres of wash and one litre of arrack from the house of the petitioner. The petitioner was not present at the time of search and seizure, so that he could not be arrested. Now apprehending arrest, he has moved this Court under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Public Prosecutor.
4. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the items
were not seized from his house but from an adjacent property over which he has no control; he was actually present at the time of seizure, but the Excise Officials were convinced about his innocence and that was why he was not arrested. He has no criminal antecedents to his credit.
5. The latter submission has been endorsed by the learned Public Prosecutor.
6. Now the contrabands have already been seized under a
mahazar. The question whether the items were in the immediate possession of the petitioner, he is guilty of the offence etc., can be decided only after taking evidence. Pending adjudication, his custodial interrogation is not necessary. Moreover, offences under Section 8(1) and 55(g) of the Abkari Act do not postulate any statutory minimum substantive sentence, so that the embargo under Section 41A of the Abkari Act is not attracted. Therefore, the petitioner is at liberty to surrender before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today and make himself available for interrogation. In the event of arrest, he shall be released on bail on executing bond for Rs.50,000/-(Rupees Fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer; shall co-operate with the investigation, shall not try to contact or influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence and shall not involve in any crime during the period on bail. Bail application is allowed as above. Sd/- K.HARIPAL JUDGE
Jms/30.07 //True Copy// P.A to Judge