IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
Bail Appl..No. 2808 of 2010()
1. T.V.PAVITHRAN, AGED 39 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.MURUGAN P.V.
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA
Dated :31/05/2010
O R D E R
K.HEMA, J
--------------------
Bail Application No.2808 Of 2010
-------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 31st day of May 2010
ORDER
This petition is for anticipatory bail.
2. The alleged offences are under Sections 56(b) of Abkari
Act r/w: rule 8(3) and 9(2) of Kerala Abkari Shops Disposal Rules
2002. According to prosecution, a sample of toddy was taken from
the toddy shop conducted by the second accused. Petitioner was
sales man at the time of sampling. On analysis of the toddy it was
reported that it contained 9.96 % of Ethyl Alcohol as against the
permissible percentage of 8.1 %.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner has not committed any offence. Second accused who is
the licensee is already granted anticipatory bail by this court as per
order dated 16.04.2010 in Bail Application No. 2172/2010. It is also
submitted that in the light of the decision reported in Unni vs.
State of Kerala (2003(3) KLT 306), the offence alleged will not
lie against the petitioner, since Ethyl Alcohol is naturally liberated
in toddy.
4. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the decision
cited by the petitioner’s counsel may not hold the field now, in the
light of the new Rule which has come into existence. As per Rule,
8.1% is the percentage of permissible quantity of Ethyl Alcohol in
Bail Application No.2808 Of 2010 2
toddy. The new Rule is introduced in the light of the decision of the
Supreme Court, it is submitted.
5. On hearing both sides, I find that the only non bailable
offence in this case is under Section 57(a) of the Abkari Act. The
person who is liable under Section 57(a) is only the licensee and
manufacturer. But, petitioner is only the sales man. I also take note
of the fact that the licensee is already granted anticipatory bail by
this court. Hence there is no ground to refuse anticipatory bail to the
petitioner and 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/-
(Rupees twenty five thousand only) with two solvent sureties
each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned
Magistrate on condition that he will report before the
Investigating officer as and when directed and co-operate with
investigation.
Petition is allowed.
Sd/-
K.HEMA, JUDGE
//TRUE COPY//
P.A TO JUDGE
vdv