IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA THURSDAY, THE 15TH JULY 2010 / 24TH ASHADHA 1932 Bail Appl..No. 4031 of 2010() ----------------------------- OR NO.9/2010 OF KOTTIYOOR FOREST RANGE, KANNUR. (S): ACCUSED --------------------------- 1. V.M.BABY S/O.MANI, AGED 43 YEARS, VADAKKEDATH HOUSE, NUCHIYAD AMSOM, DESOM, MANIKKADAVU PO. 2. V.P.SAJAN, S/O.PHILIP, AGED 36 YEARS VENGAPALLIL HOUSE, NUCHIYAD AMSOM, DESOM, MANIKKADAVU PO. BY ADV. SRI.ANIL D.KAITHAKKAL SRI.RAJESH SUKUMARAN .K RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA FOREST RANGE OFFICER, KOTTIYOOR, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.TEK CHAND. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ---------------------------------------------- Bail Application No.4031 of 2010 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 15th July, 2010. O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 2(2), (16), (36), 9, 39 and 59 read with Section 51 of Wild Life Protection Act, 1972. On getting information that an attempt is made to sell Leopard skin, the forest officials went to the spot and found four persons standing together, out of which, one person was holding a bag. On questioning them, it was revealed that they were engaged in sale of Leopard skin. The incident happened on 12.6.2010 and all the four accused were arrested from the spot. The Leopard skin was also seized. On investigation, it is revealed that first accused had gone to Shimoga with accused nos.5 to 7 and purchased Leopard skin for an amount of Rs.15,000/- and therefore, accused nos.5 to 7 are also proceeded against. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners (A5 and A7) submitted that petitioners' names are not mentioned in the mahazar. As per the details in the mahazar, only four persons were found at the scene. Petitioners are absolutely innocent of BA NO. 4031/10 2 the allegations made. It is also submitted that accused nos.1 to 3 are granted bail. 4. This petition is strongly opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the involvement of accused nos.5 to 7 is revealed from the statement given by first accused on the date of arrest itself. They were implicated in the offence on 12.6.2010. During investigation, it is understood that the person who hunted the animal was arrested in Karnataka. The investigation is in progress. This is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. The custodial interrogation of petitioners is necessary to ascertain more details about the offence. Petitioners have a definite role in the commission of the offences alleged, it is submitted. 5. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied of the submissions made by learned Public Prosecutor. Custodial interrogation of petitioners would be required for an effective investigation in this case. Petitioners are bound to surrender before the Investigating Officer and co-operate with the investigation. Petitioners have not made out any ground to get anticipatory bail. Granting of bail to the co-accused by itself is not a ground for granting anticipatory bail. BA NO. 4031/10 3 No further application in this crime by petitioners will be entertained by this court hereafter. Petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE. tgs