High Court Kerala High Court

Gourikutty vs State Of Kerala on 19 January, 2009

Kerala High Court
Gourikutty vs State Of Kerala on 19 January, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 41 of 2009()


1. GOURIKUTTY, W/O. SUKUMARAN, AGED 72
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



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

                For Petitioner  :SRI.B.RENJITHKUMAR

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA

 Dated :19/01/2009

 O R D E R
                           K. HEMA, J.
         =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
                        B.A. No. 41 of 2009
         =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
           Dated this the 19th day of January,2009

                             O R D E R

Petition for anticipatory bail.

2. The alleged offence is under section 8(2) of the Abkari

Act. According to prosecution, petitioner was found in

possession of one litre of arrack on 8-12-2008, but she could not

be arrested, since woman police constable was not available.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that

petitioner is absolutely innocent of the allegations made. She is

aged 72 years and she is also having some heart problem, as

evidenced by Annexure-A1 certificate, and she was hospitalized.

If she is arrested and remanded to jail, it will cause irreparable

injury and loss, it is submitted.

4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor

submitted that as per the case diary, petitioner was found in

possession of one litre of arrack and she is involved in various

other cases of similar nature. Hence, it is not a fit case to grant

anticipatory bail.

5. On hearing both sides, I find that the only special

circumstances pointed out is the age of petitioner and physical

ailment. Those facts alone cannot be made a ground to grant

anticipatory bail. Those may be considered in a petition filed

BA 41/2009 -2-

under section 437. The consideration for granting bail under

sections 437 and 438 are different. Petitioner could not point out

any materials to indicate that she has not committed any offence,

except making bare assertions of innocence. Hence, following

order is passed.

Petitioner shall surrender before the

Magistrate court concerned and in such event, bail

application, if any is filed, shall be disposed of on

merit, without any delay.

This petition is disposed of accordingly.

K.HEMA, JUDGE.

mn.