Dismissed

Binoy v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC12 Jun 2018Bail Appl./2868/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a crisp order, the Kerala High Court dismissed a bail application filed by an accused charged with illicit distillation under the Abkari Act. The court held that prima facie materials linked the applicant to the crime and denied anticipatory bail, directing his surrender within 10 days.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail denied; accused directed to surrender before investigating officer within 10 days.

Binoy Vs State of Kerala — Narcotics (NDPS) | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF JUNE 2018 / 22ND JYAISHTA, 1940 Bail Appl..No. 2868 of 2018

¶5

CRIME NO.11/2018 OF THE MOOLAMATTOM EXCISE RANGE OFFICE IN IDUKKI DISTRICT) PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED

¶6

BINOY, S/O.PARAMESWARAN, MUNDACKAL VEEDU, PUNNAYAARKARAYIL, KANJIKKUZHY VILLAGE, IDUKKI TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT- KERALA, PINCODE-685606.

¶7

BY ADVS.SRI.RENJITH B.MARAR SMT.LAKSHMI.N.KAIMAL SRI.R.LAIJU

¶8

RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT:

¶9

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE EXCISE INSPECTOR, EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, MOOLAMATTOM, ILAMDESOM (P.O), IDUKKI DISTRICT, THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

¶10

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.AMJAD ALI

¶11

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12-06-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶12

IAP

¶13

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, J.

¶14

B.A. No.2868 of 2018

¶15

Dated this the 12^th day of June, 2018

¶16

ORDER

¶17

1.This application is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

¶18

2.The applicant herein is the accused in Crime No.11 of 2018 of the Moolamattom Excise Range, registered under Sections 55(g) of the Abkari Act.

¶19

3.The prosecution allegation is that on 28.3.2018 at 9.15 pm, a search was conducted by the Excise Inspector in the house of the applicant herein based on reliable information and about

¶20

40 litres of wash and some utensils meant for distillation of arrack were seized.

¶21

4.Heard the contentions advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the applicant as well as the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶22

5.I am not satisfied with the submission of the learned counsel that the applicant has been falsely implicated. Though Annexures-A4 to A6 are produced, there is nothing on record

¶23

B.A.No.2868 of 2018 2

¶24

which would show those representations were actually submitted before the authorities. Prima facie, it appears that there are materials linking the applicant with the Crime.

¶25

6.Having regard to the nature and gravity of the allegations, I am not persuaded to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. I direct the applicant to surrender before the investigating officer within a period of 10 days from today. After interrogation, the applicant shall be produced before the court having jurisdiction. If an application for bail is preferred, the same shall be considered and orders shall be passed on its merits on the same day itself.

¶26

This application will stand dismissed.

¶27

Sd/-

¶28

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V., JUDGE

¶29

IAP //True Copy\

¶30

P.A to Judge

Binoy v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Binoy 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

Sajith Vs State of Kerala

Shibu @ Thumpi Vs the State of Kerala

Babu K.V Vs State of Kerala

Pushpangadan Vs State of Kerala

Saifudheen Vs State of Kerala

Devadas P.K Vs State of Kerala