Back
2022 Supreme(Online)(KER) 62481
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
VIJU ABRAHAM, J
NAVEEN.A – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Bail Appl./6256/2022
A.ARUNKUMAR
The court emphasized the importance of stringent conditions for anticipatory bail when the accused is charged under the Abkari Act, given the nature of the alleged offences.
Headnote:
Bail - Anticipatory Bail - Abkari Act Section List - The court examined the provisions of the Abkari Act, particularly Sections 58 and 67B, and granted anticipatory bail due to the lack of prior criminal record and the nature of allegations, imposing stringent conditions for bail.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner faced charges under the Abkari Act for transporting 20.16 litres of IMFL without knowledge of its contents. He argued that he was falsely implicated as an auto driver.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that custodial interrogation was not necessary. The petitioner's lack of prior criminal records and the time elapsed since the crime were significant in granting bail under strict conditions.
Issues: Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner accused of offences under the Abkari Act considering the nature of the accusations and the need for custodial interrogation.
Ratio Decidendi: Anticipatory bail was granted based on the absence of previous criminal records, the nature of the offences, and the likelihood of cooperation with the investigation.
Final Decision: Anticipatory bail granted with stringent conditions.
ORDER
Application for anticipatory bail.
2. Petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.107 of 2021 of Kumbala Excise Range, Kasaragod District registered alleging commission of offences punishable under Sections 58 and 67B of the Abkari Act .
3. The prosecution allegation is that, on
12.06.2021 at 6 pm near KSEB Post No.V/BP-23/1 situated in Bakery Junction Pavoor Road at Bakery Junction in Vorkady Village accused was found transporting of 20.16 litres of IMFL (meant for sale in Karnataka only) in an Autorikshaw bearing Reg.No.KL 14 V 6299, and thereby committed the above said offences.
4. The petitioner submits that he has been falsely implicated in the above said crime. Petitioner is an auto driver, some passengers have kept some boxes in the auto and he has absolutely no knowledge about the alleged contraband which was carried in the autorikshaw.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.
6. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application for bail mainly contending that large quantity of IMFL was seized from the vehicle of the petitioner, but submitted that the petitioner has no other criminal antecedents. It is seen that the crime is registered as early as in 2021.
Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, and nature of the allegations, I am of the opinion that custodial interrogation may not be required for the purpose of investigation and only a limited custody is required for the same. I am inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, but on stringent conditions. The above bail application is allowed with the following directions. The petitioner shall surrender before the investigating officer on 14.12.2022 and make himself available for interrogation on that day or on any other day/days and time as directed by the investigating officer. The petitioner shall co- operate with the investigation. In the event of arrest of the petitioner in Crime No.107 of 2021 of Kumbala Excise Range, he shall be produced before the jurisdictional Magistrate on the same day and be released on bail on the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall execute a bond for sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;
(ii) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer in Crime No.107/2021 of Kumbala Excise Range, as and when required;
(iii) The petitioner shall not tamper with any evidence;
(iv) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any witness acquainted with him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer;
(v) The petitioner shall not involve in any other crime while on bail.
If any of the aforesaid conditions are violated, the Investigating Officer in Crime No.107/2021 of Kumbala Excise Range, may file an application before the jurisdictional court for cancellation of bail.
It is made clear that it is within the power of the police to investigate the matter and if necessary to effect recoveries on the information if any given by the petitioner even when the petitioner is on bail as per the judgment of the Apex Court in Sushila Aggarwal and others v. State (NCT of Delhi)
and another ( 2020 (1) KHC 663 ).
