IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 6338 of 2008()
1. DRAVIAN, S/O.RAMANKUTTY, KAREKUNNATH
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.BABU S. NAIR
For Respondent :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA
Dated :16/01/2008
O R D E R
K.HEMA, J.
-----------------------------------------
B.A.No. 6338 of 2008
-----------------------------------------
Dated this the 16th January, 2009
O R D E R
This petition is for anticipatory bail.
2. The alleged offences are under Sections 55(a), (h), (g)
and 8(1) and (2) of the Abkari Act. According to prosecution, a
search was conducted in a house by the Excise officials and 891
litres of spirit and 450 litres of toddy were seized from there.
Packet sealing machine and polythene covers were also seized.
A case was registered against petitioners, since he is the owner
of the building. The seizure was effected on 9.9.2008.
3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that petitioner
is only the owner of the building, but the building is in
possession of some other person. Annexure-A rent deed
executed on 24.3.2008 would reveal that the house is already
leased to another person. During the pendency of this petition,
investigating officer was directed to ascertain about the
genuineness of Annexure-A. On the investigation, it was
revealed that the stamp paper, in which the rent deed was
BA.6338/08 2
executed, was purchased by the lessee himself. But the police
seeks to arrest petitioner as the owner of the property, since
the lessee is absconding, it is submitted. Learned counsel for
petitioner submitted that if anticipatory bail is not granted,
petitioner will be put to irreparable injury and loss.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor fairly conceded that as per
the statement of the stamp vendor, Annexure-A document was
executed on a stamp paper, which was purchased in the name
of the lessee. But, according to him, police was not able to trace
out the said person and the investigation is in progress.
On hearing both sides, I find that anticipatory bail is to be
granted, since refusal of the same will result in injustice, if
ultimately it is found that petitioner is only the owner of the
property and not a person in possession of the building.
Therefore, the following order is passed:
Petitioner shall surrender before the Magistrate
Court concerned within seven days from today and
he shall be released on bail on his executing a bond
for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the
BA.6338/08 3
like sum to the satisfaction of the Magistrate Court
concerned, on the following conditions:
i) Petitioner shall report before the investigating
officer within three days from the date of
release and make himself available for
interrogation and co-operate with the
investigation.
ii). Petitioner shall not commit any offence while
on bail.
Petition is allowed.
K.HEMA, JUDGE
vgs.