Sulthan Bathery: A court in Sultan Bathery has rejected the bail plea of Reporter TV managing director Anto Augustine following his arrest in an abkari case involving the seizure of excess liquor from a residential property.

The main dispute before the court centred on who owns and who was in physical possession of the house where Excise officials seized the liquor stock.

Augustine's defence lawyers argued that he does not own the property and was not present when the Excise team conducted the search.

In their petition, the lawyers said Augustine had neither legal title nor physical possession of the building for more than four years. They also claimed that the property had earlier been attached and auctioned by the State Bank of India following a default on loan repayments.

According to official auction documents cited in the case, Lilly Jose was the successful bidder. It has since emerged that Jose is Augustine's mother-in-law. Also, Augustine and his immediate family continue to live in the house from which the liquor was seized. There are also allegations that other prospective buyers were prevented from participating in the public auction, allegedly causing financial losses to the bank.

Panchayat records cited against defence

The prosecution challenged the defence's claims over ownership and possession by producing local body records before the court.

Records from Muttil Panchayat list Augustine as the current owner of the house and show that he had paid the building tax.

The defence, however, argued that the bank's auction certificate has greater legal validity than local tax receipts. The lawyers also contended that possession of excess liquor is a bailable offence.

They further questioned the manner in which the search was conducted, arguing that it was not carried out through an authorised procedure.

Court says issues can be examined at trial

Magistrate Athena Biju held that disputes relating to the property's title and the alleged defects in the search are matters to be examined during the trial rather than at the bail stage.

The court observed that the documents produced by the prosecution provide prima facie evidence that the accused was in possession of the house.

The State Government also strongly opposed the bail plea.