The Court dismissed an application for pre-arrest bail, ruling that anticipatory bail is not maintainable under the Abkari Act due to Section 41A embargo, directing the petitioner to surrender within two weeks.
Petitioner directed to surrender before investigating officer within two weeks and apply for regular bail subsequently.
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 ASHOK MENON
THURSDAY, THE 02ND DAY OF JULY 2020 / 11TH ASHADHA, 1942
Bail Appl..No.3502 OF 2020
CRIME NO.399/2020 OF Vellathooval Police Station , Idukki
PETITIONER/S:
SUNNY THOMAS AGED 39 YEARS S/O.THOMAS, PUTHUVA HOUSE, THOKKUPARA P.O., PALLIAVSAL VILLAGE, IDUKKI DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN
RESPONDENT/S:
1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031.
2 STATION HOUSE OFFICER, VELLATHOOVAL POLICE STATION, IDUKKI DISTRICT-685 563.
R1-2 BY ADDL.DIRECTOR GENERAL OF PROSECUTION
OTHER PRESENT:
SMT.K.K.SHEEBA PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.07.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Bail Appl..No.3502 OF 2020 2
O R D E R
Dated this the 2nd day of July 2020
Petitioner is the 1st accused in Crime No.399/2020 of Vellathooval Police Station, Idukki for having allegedly committed offence punishable under Section 55(g) of the Abkari Act and Section 332 of the IPC. The prosecution case in brief is that on 21.04.2020, while the police party were on patrol duty, at Rajakkad Police Station, they got information that the petitioner keeping wash in his cardamom plantation for the purpose of distilling of arrack and accused 2 and 3 gone there to purchase arrack from him. Thereafter, the Sub Inspector of Police searched the premises and they found a person flee from there with a can in his hand. He could not be apprehended as he had bitten the forearm of the constable. The police seized 925 litres of wash and utensils for distillation from the property. Hence crime was registered. The 2nd accused was apprehended and he revealed that the person who fled was the 3rd accused. Some distance away the patrol party saw the petitioner. But he too filed the petition apprehends arrest and is before this Court seeking pre-arrest bail.
Bail Appl..No.3502 OF 2020 3
With these observations, the B.A is dismissed.
Sd/-
ASHOK MENON
JUDGE
rmm
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an application for anticipatory bail can be entertained under the Abkari Act in view of Section 41A.
Whether the petitioner seeking pre-arrest bail should be granted relief under the Bail Act given the embargo on anticipatory bail.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Muraleedharan v. State of KeralaReferred¶22
Muraleedharan v. State of Kerala [2001 KHC 411]
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Sunny Thomas
State of Kerala
Ashok Menon
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
