IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH, J
NAVAS – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
BAIL APPL. NO. 14384 OF 2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts of the case involving unauthorized possession of liquor. (Para 2) |
| 2. court's reasoning regarding the gravity of the offence and necessity of investigation. (Para 5) |
| 3. final ruling on the bail application. (Para 7) |
ORDER
This application is filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, BNSS ), seeking pre-arrest bail.
2. The applicant is the accused No.2 in Crime No.131/2025 of Excise Range Office, Vamanapuram, Thiruvananthapuram District. The offence alleged is punishable under Section 55(i) of the Abkari Act .
3. The prosecution case, in short, is as follows: On
06.11.2025 at 10:30 p.m. at Thempamoodu Junction of Pullampara Village, the accused No.1 was found in unauthorized possession of 3.5 litres of Indian Made Foreign Liquor, which was purchased from the applicant for sale. The applicant was found in unauthorised possession of 12 litres of Indian Made Foreign Liquor for sale in his house "Alfiya Manzil", on Thempamoodu of Pullampara Village In Nedumangadu Taluk at 11:30 am on the same day by the Assistant Excise Inspector and party of Excise Circle Office, Nedumangadu. Thus, accused No.1 was arrested on the spot but, the applicant could not be arrested on the spot as he escaped. Hence, the applicant is alleged to have committed an offence punishable u/s.55(i) of Kerala Abkari Act .
4. I have heard Smt. Fiza Hussain, the learned counsel for the applicant and Sri. M.C. Ashi, the learned Senior Public Prosecutor. Perused the case diary.
5. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. The counsel further submitted that no materials are on record to connect the applicant with the alleged crime; hence, he is entitled to bail. The learned Senior Public Prosecutor, on the other hand, submitted that the alleged incident occurred as part of the applicant's intentional criminal acts, and if he is released on bail at this stage, it will affect the course of the investigation.
6. The law regarding the grant or refusal of pre-
arrest bail is well settled. Pre-arrest bail cannot be granted as a matter of course. The power under Section 482 of BNSS could be exercised only when a special case is made out, that too, recording reasons thereof. Perusal of the case diary reveals that the accusation made against the applicant is very serious in nature, and it prima facie shows a premeditated criminal act on his part.
7. The investigation is in a preliminary stage. The custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary for the investigation. As rightly argued by the learned Senior Public Prosecutor, the possibility of the applicant influencing the witnesses and interfering with the investigation cannot be ruled out if he is released on bail. Considering the gravity of the offence and stage of the investigation, I am of the view that this is not a fit case where the extraordinary jurisdiction vested with this Court under Section 482 of BNSS could be invoked. The bail application is, accordingly, dismissed.
Sd/-
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.