V.V. George vs State Of Kerala
2023 Latest Caselaw 608 Ker

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 608 Ker
Judgement Date : 12 January, 2023

Kerala High Court

V.V. George vs State Of Kerala on 12 January, 2023

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                   PRESENT
                   THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM
     THURSDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF JANUARY 2023 / 22ND POUSHA, 1944
                        BAIL APPL. NO. 10448 OF 2022
     CRIME NO.3/2021 OF Machiplavu Forest Station Office, Idukki
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:

            V.V. GEORGE, AGED 60 YEARS,
            S/O. VALETH VARKEY KARADIPARA, KALLAR - VATTAYAR P.O.,
            IDUKKI-685565

            BY ADVS.
            JOBY JACOB PULICKEKUDY
            ANIL GEORGE



RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:

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

     2      THE FOREST RANGE OFFICER
            ADIMALI RANGE,
            IDUKKI-685561, PIN - 685561


     THIS   BAIL     APPLICATION   HAVING    COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
12.01.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 B.A. No.10448 of 2022                    2

                   VIJU ABRAHAM, J.
                 -------------------
                B.A. No.10448 of 2022
            -----------------------------
      Dated this the 12th day of January, 2023

                                ORDER

Application for anticipatory bail.

2. Petitioner is the accused in OR No.3 of 2021

of Machiplavu Forest Station, Adimali Range

registered alleging commission of offence punishable

under Section 27(1)(e)(I) and (IV) of the Kerala

Forest Act.

3. The prosecution allegation is that, the

petitioner encroached upon reserve forest and cut

and removed the plants there and thereafter,

cultivated cardamom in the said land. The specific

case of the petitioner is that he and his family are

having possession of 18.460 hectors of land in

Anaviratty Village. By Annexure-1, petitioner was

granted Kuthakappattam lease with respect to about

10 acres of land. The forest Authorities threatened

the petitioner that a portion of the property

granted to him includes forest land. But there was

no demarcation done by the forest officials.

Therefore, the petitioner was constrained to

approach this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.19781/2017

for a direction restraining the Forest Officers from

interfering with the agricultural operations in the

property. This Court has disposed of the same as per

Annexure-3 judgment wherein a specific direction was

issued that if there is any dispute regarding the

boundary, the forest officials shall immediately

place the matter before the Cardamom Settlement

Officer who shall resolve the said issue with notice

to the petitioner and others and a further direction

that, in the event of dispute, the forest officials

shall refrain from initiating criminal proceedings

against the petitioner until the matter is settled

by the Cardamom settlement Officer. Thereafter, for

a considerable period there were no obstruction from

the forest authorities. Thereafter, the forest

officials threatened the petitioner that the

cardamom plants will be cut and removed and in the

said circumstances, the petitioner again approached

this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.24117 of 2020

wherein Annexure-4 interim order was passed

permitting the petitioner to cultivate the property

granted with a further direction that the petitioner

shall not trespass into the reserve forest.

Thereafter, a crime was registered as OR No.14 of

2020 against the petitioner on a similar allegation,

this Court has granted bail to the petitioner as per

Annexure-5 order. Now the petitioner is issued with

a notice under Section 160 of Cr.P.C required his

appearance as evident from Annexure-6. Petitioner's

specific case is that going by Annexure-3 judgment

even if there is any dispute, it has to be placed

before the Cardamom Settlement Officer for a

resolution and only based on the order of the

Cardamom Settlement Officer a crime could be

registered and the registration of the present crime

is in clear violation of the direction in Annexure-3

judgment.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner

and the learned Public Prosecutor.

5. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the

application for bail mainly contending that the

allegation against the petitioner is that he had

encroached upon reserve forest and has cultivated

cardamom in the said area.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of

the case, and nature of the allegations, I am of the

opinion that custodial interrogation is not required

for the purpose of investigation and only a limited

custody be granted for the same. I am inclined to

grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner, but on

conditions. The above bail application is allowed

with the following directions. The petitioner shall

surrender before the investigating officer on

18.01.2023 and make himself available for

interrogation on that day or on any other day/days

(in between 9 am & 6 pm) as directed by the

investigating officer. The petitioner shall co-

operate with the investigation. In the event of

arrest of the petitioner in OR No.3 of 2021 of

Machiplavu Forest Station, he shall be produced

before the jurisdictional Magistrate on the same day

and be released on bail on the following conditions:

(i) The petitioner shall execute a bond for sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the jurisdictional Court;

(ii) The petitioner shall appear before the investigating officer in O.R No.3 of 2021 of Machiplavu Forest Station, on every Saturday at 11 am, for a period of one month and thereafter, as and when required by the investigating officer;

(iii) The petitioner shall not tamper with any evidence;

(iv) The petitioner shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to any witness acquainted with him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer;