High Court Kerala High Court

C.N.Raghavan vs The Sub Inspector on 6 January, 2010

Kerala High Court
C.N.Raghavan vs The Sub Inspector on 6 January, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 6947 of 2009()


1. C.N.RAGHAVAN, AGED 50 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE SUB INSPECTOR,
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.SETHUNATH

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN

 Dated :06/01/2010

 O R D E R
                        K.T.SANKARAN, J.
                  ---------------------------------------------
                       B.A.No.6947 of 2009
                  ---------------------------------------------
              Dated this the 6th day of January, 2010


                               ORDER

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section

438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is

accused No.2 in Crime No.443 of 2009 of Mundakkayam Police

Station.

2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under

Sections 55(a) & (i) of the Abkari Act.

3. The prosecution case is that on 29.9.2009, at 6.30

P.M., the petitioner and other accused were found transporting

4.875 litres of Indian made foreign liquor in an autorickshaw. It

is alleged that the petitioner ran away. Accused Nos.1 and 3

were arrested. It is submitted that the investigation revealed

that there are materials to indicate that the petitioner is also a

party to the transportation of Indian made foreign liquor

intended for sale.

4. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the

case, the nature of the offence and other circumstances, I do

not think that this is a fit case where the discretionary relief

BA No.6947/2009 2

under Section 438 of Crl.P.C. can be granted in favour of the

petitioner. If anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, it

would adversely affect the proper and smooth investigation of

the case.

For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Application is dismissed.

K.T.SANKARAN,
JUDGE
csl