High Court Kerala High Court

Natarajan M.P. vs State Of Kerala on 3 January, 2008

Kerala High Court
Natarajan M.P. vs State Of Kerala on 3 January, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl No. 7972 of 2007()


1. NATARAJAN M.P., AGED 47 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



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

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.K.SUBRAMANIAN

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :03/01/2008

 O R D E R
                             R. BASANT, J.

               ````````````````````````````````````````````````````
                       B.A. No. 7972 OF 2007 F
               ````````````````````````````````````````````````````
              Dated this the 3rd day of January, 2008

                                 O R D E R

Application for anticipatory bail. Petitioner faces

allegations under the Kerala Abkari Act. He was allegedly

found to be in possession of 5 litres of arrack on 12.12.07.

When the excise party detected the crime, he allegedly took

to his heels and could not be apprehended. His name and

details were ascertained by the officials from the local

witnesses. The petitioner has not been arrested so far.

Investigation is in progress. The petitioner apprehends

imminent arrest.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

the petitioner is absolutely innocent and it is a case of

mistaken identity. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the

application for anticipatory bail and points out that all available

indications point to the culpability of the petitioner. He further

points out that the petitioner is involved in an earlier crime

under the Kerala Abkari Act also.

BA.7972/07
: 2 :

3. Having considered all the relevant inputs, I find

merit in the opposition by the learned Public Prosecutor. I am

satisfied that there are no features in this case which would

justify the invocation of the extraordinary equitable discretion

under Section 438 Cr.P.C. This, I agree with the learned

Public Prosecutor, is a fit case where the petitioner must

appear before the investigating officer or the learned

Magistrate having jurisdiction and then seek regular bail in the

normal and ordinary course.

4. In the result, this petition is dismissed. Needless to

say, if the petitioner surrenders before the investigating officer

or the learned Magistrate and applies for bail, after giving

sufficient prior notice to the Prosecutor in charge of the case,

the learned Magistrate must proceed to pass appropriate

orders on merits, in accordance with law and expeditiously.

(R.BASANT, JUDGE)
aks