Kerala High Court
Ajeesh @ Ajayan vs State Of Kerala on 19 February, 2016
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.P.JYOTHINDRANATH
FRIDAY,THE 19TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016/30TH MAGHA, 1937
Bail Appl..No. 1162 of 2016 ()
-------------------------------
CRIME NO. 3/2016 OF KOTTAYAM EXCISE RANGE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT
--------------
PETITIONER/ACCUSED :
----------------------------------------
AJEESH @ AJAYAN, AGED 34 YEARS,
S/O. RAVIKUMAR, PULIKKUZHIMATTAM HOUSE,
S.PURAM P.O., KURICHY.
BY ADV. SRI.T.P.PRADEEP
RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT :
-------------------------------------------------
STATE OF KERALA,
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KERALA.
BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SMT. MADHUBEN
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 19-02-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE
FOLLOWING:
sts
K.P.JYOTHINDRANATH, J.
-------------------------------
B.A.No.1162 of 2016
----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 19th day of February, 2016
ORDER
This is a regular bail application. The offences alleged are under Section 58 of the Abkari Act. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner is apprehending arrest and detention in connection with crime No.3/2016 of Kottayam Excise Range.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted before me that an application as B.A. No.668/2016 is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on 25.01.2016. Pending consideration, the petitioner was arrested on 30.01.2016 and produced before the learned Magistrate. The petitioner got a grievance that the arrest was illegal as the excise officials got no right to arrest the petitioner without arrest warrant when occurrence report is already forwarded to court and the petitioner is not arrested at the time of detention.
3. But surely, the said anticipatory bail is dismissed by this Court as infructuous when the arrest is reported today. Anyway, in this case, the petitioner is arrested on 30.01.2016 B.A. No.1162/2016 2 and it can be seen that a bail application was seen moved before the Magistrate which was also seen rejected. As such, petitioner moved before this Court under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
4. Considering all attending circumstances, and also after keeping in mind that first remand period is already over, I feel that this is a case where anticipatory bail can be granted. Hence, bail is granted on the following conditions:
(i). Petitioner shall be released on bail on executing a bond for `.25,000/- with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the investigating officer.
(ii) Petitioner shall not commit similar offences during bail period.
(iii). Petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation.
On the above conditions, this regular bail application is allowed.
sd/-
K.P.JYOTHINDRANATH
JV JUDGE