Jinto Devasya vs State Of Kerala

The applicant is arrayed as an accused in Crime No.30 of 2020 of Devikulam Excise Range, Idukki, for having allegedly committed offences

punishable under Sections 8(1) and (2) and 55 (g) of the Abkari Act. The prosecution case, in brief, is this;

On 28.08.2020 at about 10.30 AM, while the Excise party were engaged in patrol duty in Munipara kara in Mankulam Village, they saw the

applicant and another person engaged in the distillation of arrack within the forest area close to the house of the applicant. On seeing the Excise party,

both persons fled away from there. They could not be apprehended. The applicant was subsequently implicated as an accused based on the statement

given by the other witnesses. The applicant apprehends arrest and has, therefore, approached this Court for anticipatory bail stating that he is innocent

and the allegations are not true.

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the applicant and the learned Public Prosecutor. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant states

that he alone has been made an accused and the other person, who was actually involved in the process of distillation and fled away from there has

not yet been identified or implicated as an accused. And, therefore, the falsity of the prosecution case being explicit he is entitled to anticipatory bail.

The fact whether the other accused involved could be identified or whether the prosecution case is false are all matters of evidence which needs to be

examined by the trial court during the trial.

In view of the embargo under Section 41A of the Abkari Act and in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Muraleedharan

v. State of Kerala [2001 KHC 411], the applicant cannot seek anticipatory bail in an Abkari case. The applicant is directed to surrender before the

Investigating Officer within two weeks and after interrogation, he shall be produced before the jurisdictional court at the earliest, where he is at liberty

to apply for a regular bail which shall be preferably considered and disposed of on the very same date, keeping in view the dictum of this Court in

Sukumari v. State of Kerala, 2001 (1) KLT 22.

With these observations, the bail application is dismissed.