Ranjith Kumar P vs State Of Kerala

This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C.

The applicant is the 2nd accused in Crime No.1/2021 of Valapattanam Police Station for having allegedly committed the offence punishable under

Section 55(i) of the Abkari Act.

The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 31.12.2020 at about 22.45 hours, the Sub Inspector of Police and his party while on patrol duty reached a

place Poothapara, they found the applicant and another were found in possession of 4.5 litres of Indian Made Foreign Liquor. The applicant fled away

from there and could not be apprehended.

The applicant states that he is innocent and that he has been implicated solely on the confession statement given by the other accused and it is not

admissible in law, and therefore, seeks pre-arrest bail.

Heard the learned Counsel for the applicant and the learned Public Prosecutor.

Whether the confession statement of the co-accused is admissible or not has to be decided by the trial court during trial. In view of the embargo

under Section 41A of the Abkari Act, and the decision of the Apex Court in Muraleedharan v. State of Kerala, 2001 KHC 411, I find that the

application for pre-arrest bail cannot be entertained by this Court. Under the circumstances, the application is only to be dismissed.

The applicant is therefore directed to surrender before the investigating officer within two weeks and the investigating officer shall, after

interrogation, produce him before the jurisdictional Magistrate and that he shall be at liberty to apply for regular bail before the jurisdictional

Magistrate, which shall be disposed of preferably on the very same date, keeping in view the dictum of this Court in Sukumari v. State of Kerala, 2001

(1) KLT 22.