High Court Kerala High Court

P.K.Soman vs State Of Kerala on 15 June, 2009

Kerala High Court
P.K.Soman vs State Of Kerala on 15 June, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 3201 of 2009()


1. P.K.SOMAN, S/O.KOCHURAMAN
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.G.HARIHARAN

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

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

 Dated :15/06/2009

 O R D E R
                             K.T.SANKARAN, J.
                ------------------------------------------------------
                         B.A. NO. 3201 OF 2009
                ------------------------------------------------------
                     Dated this the 15th June, 2009


                                  O R D E R

This is an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.2 in C.P.No.4 of 2009,

on the file of the Court of the Judicial Magistrate of the First Class – II,

Peermade in Crime No.58 of 2008 of Peruvanthaanam Police Station.

2. The offence alleged against the petitioner is under Sections 55

(a) and (g) and Sections 8(1) and (2) of the Abkari Act.

3. The prosecution case is that on 14.3.2008, the accused

persons, three in number, were found possessing 20 litres of illicit arrack,

700 litres of wash and the materials, utensils and apparatus for the

purpose of manufacturing arrack. Accused Nos.1 and 2 ran away from

the scene. Accused No.3 was arrested. Learned Public Prosecutor

submits that accused Nos.1 and 2 were not arrested as they were

absconding. Subsequently, charge was laid. Summons was issued to the

accused, which was not served. The petitioner states that he did not

know about the case and the issue of summons. It would appear that

warrant was issued later. On 3.6.2009, the petitioner surrendered before

B.A. NO. 3201 OF 2009

:: 2 ::

Court and applied for bail. The Bail Application was dismissed.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not think that the

petitioner is entitled to get bail at present. The Bail Application is

accordingly dismissed.

(K.T.SANKARAN)
Judge

ahz/