Haridas @ Santhosh vs State Of Kerala

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 11181 Ker
Judgement Date : 16 April, 2024

Kerala High Court

Haridas @ Santhosh vs State Of Kerala on 16 April, 2024

Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan

Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                   PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
           TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 27TH CHAITHRA, 1946
                          BAIL APPL. NO. 1336 OF 2024
          CRIME NO.2/2024 OF DEVIKULAM FOREST RANGE OFFICE, IDUKKI
 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT DATED 12.02.2024 IN CRMC NO.85 OF 2024 OF
                DISTRICT COURT & SESSIONS COURT,THODUPUZHA


PETITIONER(S)/ACCUSED NO.1:

              HARIDAS @ SANTHOSH,
              AGED 46 YEARS
              S/O. GANGADHARAN,PALLIKKASSERY HOUSE, EZHALLOOR KARA,
              KUMARAMANGALAM VILLAGE, THODUPUZHA, PIN - 685 605

              BY ADVS.
              C.P.UDAYABHANU
              NAVANEETH.N.NATH



RESPONDENT(S)/COMPLAINANT:

     1        STATE OF KERALA,
              REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA,
              ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031

     2        RANGE FOREST OFFICER,
              DEVIKULAM FOREST RANGE OFFICE,IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN - 685613

BY ADV.

              SRI. PRASANTH M P, PUBLIC PROSECUTOR



     THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.04.2024,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 B.A. NO. 1336 OF 2024


                                2




              P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
          --------------------------------------------
                 B.A. No.1336 of 2024
         ----------------------------------------------
       Dated this the 16th day of April, 2024



                          ORDER

This Bail application is filed under Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code.

2. The petitioner is the 1st accused in O.R. No.2/2024 of Range Forest Office, Devikulam registered for the offence punishable under Section 2(16), 9, 39, 50, 51 of Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972.

3. The prosecution case is that on 15.01.2024, the petitioner and other accused persons entered into the Vakkil Thottam cardamom estate at Kurizupara B.A. NO. 1336 OF 2024 3 Bhagam coming under the Pallivasal section in Devikulam Forest range and and hunted a 'barking dear' coming within the schedule one of Wild Life Protection Act and it was slaughtered and portion of the meat was cooked and the remaining portion of the meat was transported and thereby committed the alleged offence.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. Learned Public Prosecutor seriously opposed the bail application.

5. After hearing both sides, I think this is not a fit case, in which orders u/s.438 Cr.P.C can be passed.

At this stage the counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner will surrender before the Investigating Officer. The counsel also submitted that B.A. NO. 1336 OF 2024 4 there may be a direction to produce the petitioner after interrogation before the jurisdictional court and there may be a direction to the jurisdictional court to consider the bail application on the date of production of the petitioner. I think that prayer can be allowed.

6. Considering the submission of the counsel for the petitioner, this bail application is disposed of with the following directions.

1) The petitioner will surrender before the Investigating Officer within ten days from today.
2) If the petitioner surrender before the Investigating Officer as directed above, the Investigating Officer is free to interrogate the petitioner and shall produce the B.A. NO. 1336 OF 2024 5 petitioner before the jurisdictional court on the date of surrender itself.
3) The petitioner is free to file bail application before the jurisdictional court at the time of producing him before the Magistrate. If such a bail application is filed with advance copy to the prosecutor concerned, the jurisdictional court will consider that bail application in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders in it, preferably on the date of filing of the same itself.
4) The Investigating Officer is free to file custody application, if necessary, at the time of producing the petitioner and if such B.A. NO. 1336 OF 2024 6 application is filed, the jurisdictional court is free to pass appropriate orders in it also.

Sd/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN nvj JUDGE B.A. NO. 1336 OF 2024 7 APPENDIX OF BAIL APPL. 1336/2024 PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE 1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER IN CRL.

M.C. 85/2024 DATED 12.02.2024 PASSED BY THE HON'BLE SESSIONS COURT, THODUPUZHA RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS : NIL //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE