Kerala High Court
Ramesh vs State Of Kerala on 1 September, 2025
B.A. No. 11040 of 2025 1
2025:KER:66246
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JOBIN SEBASTIAN
MONDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2025 / 10TH BHADRA, 1947
BAIL APPL. NO. 11040 OF 2025
CRIME NO.703/2025 OF KUMBLA POLICE STATION, KASARGOD
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
RAMESH
AGED 41 YEARS
SON OF AITHA, R/AT PULINGUTHI HOUSE, PULINGUTHI,
MANGALPADY VILLAGE, MANJESHWAR TALUK, KASARAGOD
DISTRICT., PIN - 671322.
BY ADVS.
SRI.A.ARUNKUMAR
SRI.S.SHYAM KUMAR
SHRI.SACHIN GEORGE ARAMBAN
SMT.NESILI NAZEER
RESPONDENT/STATE:
STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY, PIN - 682031.
SMT.HASNAMOL N.S., PP
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
01.09.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
B.A. No. 11040 of 2025 2
2025:KER:66246
JOBIN SEBASTIAN, J.
...............................................
B.A. No. 11040 of 2025
...............................................
Dated this the 01st day of September, 2025
ORDER
This Bail Application is filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita(BNSSfor short).
2. Petitioner is the sole accused in Crime No.703/2025 of Kumbla Police Station, Kasargod, registered alleging offences punishable under Section 58 of the Abkari Act, 1077 (for short, 'Abkari Act').
3. The prosecution alleges that on 13.08.2025 at 20:25 hours, the accused was found in possession of 7.56 litres of Indian Made Foreign Liquor (IMFL) meant for sale only in the State of Karnataka, at a place called Santhigiri in Mangalpady Village, Kerala State, in violation of the provisions of the Abkari Act, and thereby committed the aforementioned offence.
4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor and pursued the records.
5. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is totally innocent of the allegations levelled against him. According to the Counsel, no liquor was in fact seized from the possession of the petitioner, and the petitioner was arrayed as an accused in this case on the basis of some surmises and conjectures. B.A. No. 11040 of 2025 3
2025:KER:66246 The learned Counsel further pointed out that the petitioner was arrested in this case on 13.08.2025 and since then he has been in custody. According to the Counsel, as the investigation in this case has crossed its major and crucial part, the continued detention of the petitioner will serve no purpose.
6. Per contra, the learned Public Prosecutor opposed the application. According to the learned Public Prosecutor, these sorts of offences will affect the economic condition of our State, and leniency in the matter of bail in these sort of cases is not desirable.
7. The allegation that the petitioner possessed IMFL meant for sale only in Karnataka State, for the purpose of sale in Kerala, cannot be viewed lightly. However, as rightly pointed out by the learned Counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner was arrested in this case on 13.08.2025 and has been in custody since then. The search and seizure procedures were completed at the spot of detection itself. The investigation in this case appears to have progressed substantially and is now on the verge of completion. As the investigation has crossed its major and crucial part, the continued detention of the petitioner in judicial custody will not serve any purpose. Hence, having regard to the days of detention already undergone by the petitioner and the present stage of investigation, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioner on the following conditions:-
B.A. No. 11040 of 2025 4
2025:KER:66246 1 Petitioner shall execute a bond for Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One lakh only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court.
2 The petitioner shall co-operate with the investigation and shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat, or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer.
3 Petitioner shall not leave India without permission of the jurisdictional Court.
4 Petitioner shall not commit any offence while on bail.
5 If the petitioner violates any of the above conditions, the investigating officer is at liberty to file an appropriate application for cancellation of bail before the jurisdictional court, and if such an application is filed, the jurisdictional court can pass appropriate orders irrespective of the fact that this order is passed by this Court.
Sd/-
JOBIN SEBASTIAN JUDGE mea B.A. No. 11040 of 2025 5 2025:KER:66246 APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 11040/2025 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure AI A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20-08- 2025 IN CMP.NO.1311 OF 2025 OF JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE-II, KASARAGOD