← Library
High Court of KeralaBail Appl./5601/2015dismissed

K.R.Kuttappan v. State Of Kerala

2015-09-23Honourable Mr. Justice A.Hariprasad3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.HARIPRASAD WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2015/1ST ASWINA, 1937 Bail Appl..No. 5601 of 2015 -------------------------------------- CRIME NO. 48/2015 OF CHITTAR EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, PATHANAMTHITTA ........

PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED:

-------------------------------------- K.R.KUTTAPPAN,AGED 49 YEARS, S/O.RAMACHANDRAN, KANNANTHARAYIL HOUSE, MALAYALAPPUZHA ERAM P.O., THALACHIRA, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADVS.SRI.M.T.SURESHKUMAR SRI.S.SANAL KUMAR SMT.SMITHA PHILIPOSE SMT.T.J.SEEMA SMT.BHAVANA VELAYUDHAN RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT:

------------------------------------------------ STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM.

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT.T.Y.LALIZA THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23-09-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: msv/

A. HARIPRASAD, J.

------------------------------ Bail Appl. No.5601 of 2015 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of September 2015

O R D E R

Petition filed under Sec.438 Cr.P.C.

2. Petitioner is the 1st accused in Crime No.48 of 2015 of Chittar Excise Range registered for the offence punishable under Sec.55(g) of the Kerala Abkari Act. The prosecution case is that on 20.08.2015 at about 3.00 p.m., the Excise Inspector and party detected the offence whereby some persons were found illicitly distilling arrack.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is no material to connect the petitioner with this crime.

5. The plea for anticipatory bail is strongly opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor. According to her, there are materials in the case diary to implicate the petitioner in this crime.

6. Considering the nature of offence and the

Bail Appl. No.5601 of 2015 2 statutory provisions, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner by invoking the power under Sec.438 Cr.P.C.

In the result, the bail application is dismissed. Sd/- A. HARIPRASAD JUDGE / True Copy / NS P.A. To Judge