The Kerala High Court on Tuesday granted bail to Reporter TV Managing Editor Anto Augustine in connection with a case registered under the Kerala Abkari Act for allegedly keeping Indian Made Foreign Liquor in excess of permissible limits.
Justice Kauser Edappagath ruled that continued judicial custody of the accused was unnecessary, observing that investigators had already placed him in police custody and completed the recovery of the seized items. The court also took note of a substantial dispute surrounding whether Augustine actually possessed the premises from which the liquor was recovered.
Dispute Over Premises And Possession
During the hearing, Augustine’s counsel contended that the property where the seizure took place had been sold years earlier and was no longer in his possession. According to the petition, the 14.67 ares of land and the building had originally been mortgaged to the State Bank of India, which subsequently initiated recovery proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest (SARFAESI) Act, 2002.
The bank sold the property through an e-auction to a third party on June 30, 2022, and issued a formal sale certificate on September 13, 2022. On this basis, the defense maintained that Augustine had held neither ownership nor possession of the building for more than four years prior to the inspection.
The petitioner also highlighted that he was not present at the site during the search. The official Crime and Occurrence Report confirmed that he was not arrested at the scene due to his absence, and the defense noted that investigators had obtained no statements from residents, neighbors, or independent witnesses linking him to the searched room or the contraband. His counsel argued that without such links, the legal prerequisite of conscious possession could not be established.
Addressing earlier proceedings before the Magistrate’s Court, the defense stated that the lower court had declined bail primarily on the basis of a building certificate issued by the Muttil Grama Panchayat, treating the bank sale certificate as inconclusive at that stage. The petitioner argued that a panchayat building certificate is merely a tax assessment record rather than a proof of ownership or physical possession, and that it typically continues to carry the original owner’s name until the purchaser completes property mutation formalities.
Prosecution Cites Criminal Record And Utility Records
Opposing the bail plea, Director General of Prosecutions T. Asaf Ali argued that the case went beyond routine liquor violations, describing Augustine as an influential individual with significant financial resources. The prosecution informed the court that Augustine had 41 previous cases registered against him and argued that his continued detention was critical because he was not cooperating with investigators, leaving the probe stalled.
The prosecution also challenged the claim that Augustine had relinquished control of the building. Asaf Ali presented evidence showing that property tax for the premises had been remitted in Augustine’s name in March 2026. The state further pointed out that utility connections for electricity and water remained registered in his name and that his name continued to appear on the local voters’ list at that specific address.
In response to the prosecution’s arguments, the court noted during oral exchanges that bail had consistently been granted in matters involving Indian Made Foreign Liquor. Holding that custody was no longer required following the completion of recovery procedures and prior police questioning, Justice Edappagath ordered Augustine’s release.
