High Court Kerala High Court

V.Chandran vs State Of Kerala on 24 September, 2008

Kerala High Court
V.Chandran vs State Of Kerala on 24 September, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 4486 of 2008()


1. V.CHANDRAN, AGED 38 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.C.A.MAJEED

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA

 Dated :24/09/2008

 O R D E R
                                K. HEMA, J.
        - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                        B.A. No. 4486 of 2008
        - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
          Dated this the 24th day of September,2008

                                  O R D E R

Petition for anticipatory bail.

2. The alleged offences are under sections 55(a) and 55(g)

of the Abkari Act. According to prosecution, seven litres of arrack

and some utensils used for the manufacture of liquor were seized

from the kitchen of the house owned by petitioner.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner

was not present at the scene, as admitted by prosecution.

Petitioner is also not the owner of the house. Even the kitchen,

from which the articles are allegedly seized, is kept open and

anybody can have access. Therefore, criminal liability cannot be

attached to the petitioner and hence he may be granted

anticipatory bail, it is submitted.

4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor

submitted that as per the records, the contraband articles were

seized from the kitchen attached to the house which belongs to

petitioner, where petitioner is also residing. Though petitioner was

not available at the time of seizure, he is liable for the possession

of the articles which were seized from the house belonging to him

and which was in possession of petitioner.

5. After hearing both sides, I find that there is only bare

assertions on the side of petitioner that the place from where the

BA 4486 /08 -2-

articles were seized does not belong to him. Such assertions may

not be sufficient to conclude his innocence. Unless petitioner

cannot be found guilty, even regular bail cannot be granted in

view of section 41A of the Abkari Act. In the above circumstances,

anticipatory bail cannot be granted.

This petition is dismissed.

K.HEMA, JUDGE.

mn.