Dismissed

Anandavalli v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC22 May 2014Bail Appl./2427/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, an accused in a liquor offence fearing arrest, filed for pre-arrest bail. Court held that pre-arrest bail cannot be allowed due to the nature of allegations. Directions issued for prompt production if arrested. Application disposed.

What did the court decide?

Bail application dismissed; petitioner not to be granted pre-arrest bail; to be produced before magistrate if arrested.

Anandavalli Vs State of Kerala — Narcotics (NDPS) | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF MAY 2014/1ST JYAISHTA, 1936

¶5

BAIL APPL..NO. 2427 OF 2014 ()

¶6

CRIME NO. 18/2014 OF MAVELIKKARA EXCISE RANGE OFFICE , ALAPPUZHA

¶7

PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER:

¶8

ANANDAVALLI AGED 57 YEARS

¶9

W/O.MANOHARAN, MANAMPATTAMKUZHIYIL, KURATHIKADU MURI THEKKEKARA VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA TALUK

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.A.SHAFEEK (KAYAMKULAM)

¶11

RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:

¶12

STATE OF KERALA REP BY THE EXCISE INSPECTOR MAVELIKKARA EXCISE RANGE ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM

¶13

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. LALIZA

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22.05.2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

THOMAS P.JOSEPH, J.

¶16

====================================

¶17

B.A. No.2427 of 2014

¶18

====================================

¶19

Dated this the 22^nd day of May, 2014

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.18 of 2014 of the Mavelikkara Excise Range Office for the offence under Section 51(i) of the Abkari Act, apprehends arrest and has filed this application.

¶22

Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the application. It is submitted that on 11.02.2014 at about 6.40 am the petitioner was found selling coloured liquor to a person. The excise officials seized 800 ml of IMFL, a glass and Rs.1,470 (allegedly obtained by sale of IMFL) from the petitioner. It is also submitted that the petitioner is involved in Crime No.49 of 2011 for similar offence.

¶23

Learned counsel submitted that the allegations are not true. Daughter of the petitioner is a psychiatric patient and Annexure-1 is referred to.

¶24

In the nature of the allegations made, request for prearrest bail cannot be allowed. It is directed that in case the

¶25

B.A. No.2427 of 2014

¶26

-: 2 :-

¶27

petitioner is arrested, she shall be produced before the jurisdictional magistrate as early as possible.

¶28

Application is disposed of as above.

¶29

THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE.

¶30

vsv

Anandavalli v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Anandavalli v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

K.Jacob Vs State of Kerala

Jaleel Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Jaleel.P. Vs the State of Kerala

Jerin Vs State of Kerala

Hashim Vs State of Kerala

Athul Krishna Vs State of Kerala