The High Court of Kerala dismissed a bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. by the accused in a first instance case for possessing arrack, holding that grounds for bail under the Abkari Act were not satisfied.
None. The bail application was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR MONDAY, THE 20TH JUNE 2011 / 30TH JYAISHTA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 4036 of 2011() ----------------------------CRIME NO.24/2011 OF KATTAKKADA POLICE STATION CMP.1648/2011 of J.M.F.C.,KATTAKADA ....................
PETITIONER/ACCUSED --------------------------
LIBINKUMAR @ KALYAN, SHEEJA BHAVAN, KATTAKADA PANCHAYATH, VII-344TH NUMBER, KOLLAKONAM, AMACHAL DESOM, KULATHUMMAL VILLAGE, NEYYATTINKARA.
BY ADV. SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN
RESPONDENT(S): STATE -------------------------
STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.M.S.BREEZ
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
V. RAMKUMAR, J.
Bail Application No.4036 of 2011
DATED: 20.06.2011
O R D E R
In this Petition filed under Sec. 439 Cr.P.C. the petitioner who
is the sole accused in Crime No.24/2011 of Kattakada Excise Range for offences punishable under Sections 8(1) and (2) of the Abkari Act for allegedly having been found in possession of 10 litres of arrack, seeks his enlargement on bail.
contending inter alia that the petitioner is involved in yet another Abkari case in which also the contraband substance is arrack.
he has been falsely implicated in the case. Moreover, I am not satisfied that both the grounds enumerated under sec.41A (b)(ii) of
the Abkari Act are present in this case so as to justify his release on bail.
With the above observation this Application is dismissed.
V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE.
sj
B.A.No. 2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner satisfies the grounds under Section 41A(b)(ii) of the Abkari Act for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
Whether the petitioner is falsely implicated in the case.
3 provisions across 2 enactments
LIBINKUMAR @ KALYAN
STATE
V. RAMKUMAR
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
