Sadanandan vs State of Kerala

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Orders Decided Aug 31, 2021

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1662484

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1662484
Court: Kerala Orders High Court
Judge: Honourable Mrs. Justice Shircy V.
Decided On: Aug 31, 2021
Case Number: Bail Appl./6154/2021

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Sadanandan

Respondent

State of Kerala

Excerpt

.....the petitioner was found in possession of 1.800 litres of illicit arrack by the excise officials, in contravention of the provisions of the abkari act and thereby he has committed the aforesaid offences.3. the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that he has been falsely implicated in the case and hence this application.4. the learned public prosecutor would submit that when theexcise officials seized the contraband from the possession of the petitioner, he fled away from the spot and therefore, he was not arrested then and there. now the investigation of the case is over and it is pending as c.p. no. 13 of 2021 before the jurisdictional magistrate.5. heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well the learned public prosecutor.6. having regard to the nature of the accusations levelledagainst the petitioner, i do not think that this is a fit case in which anticipatory bail can be granted to him by exercising the discretion of this court available under section 438 of the code of criminal procedure. only in exceptional cases, the said power can be exercised, but this case is not coming under the said category. the petitioner shall surrender before the court concerned and seek regular bail. dismissed. sd/- shircy v. judge sb

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHIRCY V. TUESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 9TH BHADRA, 1943 BAIL APPL. NO. 6154 OF 2021 C.P. NO. 13/2021 IN CRIME NO. 302020 OF KONNY EXCISE RANGE PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NO.1: SADANANDAN, AGED 32 YEARS S/O.PAPPU, PUTHENVEEDU, KALANJOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA - 689 694. BY ADVS. T.K.BIJU (MANJINIKARA) ANNIE M.ABRAHAM RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT: 1 STATE OF KERALA REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM - 682 031. 2 EXCISE INSPECTOR EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, KONNY - 689 653 (C.P.NO.13/2021 IN CRIME NO.30/2020 OF KONNY EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, KONNY PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. OTHER PRESENT: NOUSHAD.K.A- SR.P.P THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31.08.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

ORDER

DATED THIS THE 31ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2021 Petitioner is the accused in Crime No. 30 of 2020 of Konny Excise Range now pending as C.P. No. 13 of 2021.

2. The prosecution allegation is that on 04.04.2020 at 10.45

a.m. the petitioner was found in possession of 1.800 litres of illicit arrack by the excise officials, in contravention of the provisions of the Abkari Act and thereby he has committed the aforesaid offences.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that he has been falsely implicated in the case and hence this application.

4. The learned Public Prosecutor would submit that when the

excise officials seized the contraband from the possession of the petitioner, he fled away from the spot and therefore, he was not arrested then and there. Now the investigation of the case is over and it is pending as C.P. No. 13 of 2021 before the jurisdictional Magistrate.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well the learned Public Prosecutor.

6. Having regard to the nature of the accusations levelled

against the petitioner, I do not think that this is a fit case in which anticipatory bail can be granted to him by exercising the discretion of this Court available under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Only in exceptional cases, the said power can be exercised, but this case is not coming under the said category. The petitioner shall surrender before the court concerned and seek regular bail. Dismissed. Sd/- SHIRCY V. JUDGE sb

Same Court & Year Kerala Orders · 2021 Same Parties Sadanandan vs State of Kerala Same Judge Honourable Mrs. Justice Shircy V.