BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT ( Criminal Jurisdiction ) Thursday, the Twenty Fourth day of February Two Thousand Eleven PRESENT The Hon`ble Mr.Justice C.T.SELVAM CRL OP(MD) No.1959 of 2011 S. ABDUL HAMEED RAZAK ... PETITIONER/ACCUSED NO.3 Vs STATE REP.BY, THE RANGE OFFICER WILD LIFE CONSERVATION CENTRE, MANDAPAM, RAMANADHAPURAM DISTRICT, IN W.O.R.NO.3/2011. ... RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT For Petitioner : M/S. C.M.ARUMUGAM Advocate For Respondent : MR.P.RAJENDRAN, Government Advocate(Crl.Side) PETITION FOR ANTICIPATORY BAIL Under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. ORDER : The Court Made the following order :- The petitioner apprehends arrest at the hands of the respondent for the alleged offence punishable under Sections 9, 31, 50 and 51(1) of Wild Life Protection Act, 1972, in W.O.R.No.3 of 2011, seeks anticipatory bail under section 438 Cr.P.C. 2. Heard Mr.C.M.Arumugam, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.P.Rajendran, learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) appearing for the respondent State. 3. The case of the prosecution is that the instant petitioner along with others attempted to export Sea Cucumber in a goods vehicle belongs to this petitioner. At the time of loading the prohibited Sea animal to export the same to a foreign country, it was intercepted and the first and second accused have been arrested at that spot of the alleged occurrence. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has nothing to do with the alleged offence as stated in the complaint. He would further submit that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. 5. Learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) would oppose grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 6. Considering the fact that this petitioner is said to be the driver-cum-owner of the vehicle involved in an attempt to export Sea Cucumbers and that the accused 1 and 2 have been arrested on 17.01.2011 and released on bail on 31.01.2011 and it is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that this petitioner also would have been arrested if really involved and this petitioner is the owner of the vehicle and not the driver thereof as alleged by the prosecution and taking into consideration the submission of the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) that this petitioner has no previous case, this Court is inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to be released on bail in the event of his arrest or on his appearance before the learned Judicial Magistrate concerned, on executing a bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) with two sureties each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Rameshwaram, and on further condition that the petitioner shall appear before the respondent daily at 10.30 a.m. for a period of two weeks. Sd/- 24/02/2011 / TRUE COPY / Sub-Assistant Registrar (C.S.) Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai - 625 023. TO 1 THE JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE RAMESHWARAM 2 THE CHIEF JUDICIAL MAGISTATE RAMANATHAPURAM 3 THE RANGE OFFICER WILD LIFE CONSERVATION CENTRE, MANDAPAM, RAMANADHAPURAM DISTRICT +1. CC to M/S. C.M.ARUMUGAM Advocate SR.No.10265 ssk/03.03.2011 /5c -2p/- ORDER IN CRL OP(MD) No.1959 of 2011 Date :24/02/2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/