Allowed

Manunath v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC8 Jul 2021Bail Appl./4222/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application under Section 438 CrPC, the petitioner challenged allegations of illicit arrack possession. The Court granted bail on surrender within ten days, citing lack of minimum substantive sentence under the Abkari Act and no need for custodial interrogation since contraband was already seized.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner allowed to surrender within ten days; if arrested, released on bail upon execution of bond with two sureties.

Manunath Vs State of Kerala — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.HARIPAL

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 8^TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 17TH ASHADHA, 1943

¶5

BAIL APPL. NO. 4222 OF 2021

¶6

CRIME NO.73/2021 OF Sasthamcottah Excise Range Office,

¶7

Kollam

¶8

PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

¶9

MANUNATH AGED 26 YEARS MANUNATH MOHANANPILLAI, MANUBHAVANAM, MUTHUPILAKKADU EAST, PORUVAZHY P.O, SASTHAMKOTTA, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 690520

¶10

BY ADVS. JUSTINE JACOB K.S.ARUN KUMAR RAJEE P MATHEWS AMRUTHA K P AMRUTHA P S VIJAY SANKAR V.H.

¶11

RESPONDENT/S:

¶12

1 STATE OF KERALA

¶13

REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031

¶14

2 EXCISE INSPECTOR SASTHAMKOTTA EXCISE RANGE OFFICE KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 690521

¶15

BY ADV.SREEJA V., PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

¶16

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

¶17

08.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

BAIL APPL.NO.4222 OF 2021

¶19

-2-

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

The sole accused in crime No.73/2021 of

¶22

Sasthamkotta Excise Range is before this Court under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C., seeking anticipatory bail.

¶23

The allegation is that on 16.05.2021, the excise officials found, according to the petitioner, 1.5 litres of illicit arrack and 30 litres of wash from his property and suspecting his role in the collection of the contraband, they are after him and that made him to move this Court under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. Now he faces allegation under Section 8(1) and (2) of the Abkari Act.

¶24

The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that 3.5 litres of arrack was found in the property of the petitioner and he was not arrested. He does not have criminal antecedents.

¶25

Since the contraband has already been seized, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not warranted. He

¶26

BAIL APPL.NO.4222 OF 2021

¶27

-3-

¶28

does not have criminal antecedents also. So long as there is no statutory minimum substantive sentence prescribed against the offence under Section 8 of the Abkari Act, it cannot be thought that embargo under Sections 41A(b) of the Abakari Act will be attracted.

¶29

Therefore, the petitioner shall be at liberty to surrender before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today and will make himself available for interrogation; in the event of arrest, he shall be released on bail on executing bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer; he shall co-operate with the investigation, shall not try to contact or influence the witnesses or tamper with the evidence and shall not involve in any crime during the period on bail.

¶30

This bail application is allowed as above.

¶31

Sd/-

¶32

K.HARIPAL JUDGE

¶33

nkr/08.07.2021

Manunath v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Manunath 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

Sindu Edwin Vs State of Kerala

Athul M.K. Vs State of Kerala

Arjundas K Vs State of Kerala

Sarath Shaji Vs State of Kerala

Anoop Vs State of Kerala

Mohammed Anas Vs the State of Kerala