IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN TUESDAY, THE 29TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 8TH AGRAHAYANA 1933 Bail Appl..No. 8247 of 2011(C) ------------------------------------------ [O.R. NO.17/2011 OF FOREST RANGE OFFICER, THENMALA] .............. PETITIONER: ------------------- N.S.MONY,S/O.NALLATHAMPY,PRESIDENT, EDAPPALAYAM CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD, KALTHURUTHY,EDAPPALAYAM.P.O. BY ADV. SRI.VELLAYANI SUNDARARAJU. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE FOREST RANGE OFFICER,THENMALA. 2. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,HIGH COURT OF KERALA,ERNAKULAM. R1 & R2 BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. NOUSHAD THOTTATHIL. THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/11/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Prv. P.S.GOPINATHAN, J ---------------------------------- B.A.No.8247 of 2011 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 29th day of November, 2011. ORDER Petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is the accused in O.R No.17/2011 of Thenmala Forest Range for offences punishable under Sections 27.I(D),(e)III and V and Sections 52 and 84 of the Kerala Forest Act. Apprehending arrest, detention and torture at the hands of the Investigating Officer, petitioner seeks an order directing the respondents to release him on bail in the event of arrest with a plea that he is innocent of the allegations. 2. Having heard either side, it is revealed that the petitioner is the President of a Co-operative Society, namely, Edappalayam Harijan (Pattikajathi) Co-operative Society. The society was permitted to collect reeds for distributing among the members of the society for making various items like mat, flutes, curtains, big shopper, basket etc. The society has no right to sell the reeds as such to the third parties. According to the prosecution, the reeds collected for distributing among the members were sold to third parties by the petitioner. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had sold reeds to non member agriculturalists doing beetle and plantain cultivation for which, there is permission. Though B.A.No.8247 of 2011 2 the learned counsel submitted that the petitioner is permitted to sell reeds for purposes other than what is mentioned earlier, no document is to produced to show that there is such permission. Therefore, prima facie, petitioner had sold forest products for purposes not permitted. The case was registered on sufficient materials and I find that,this is not a fit case to invoke jurisdiction under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In the result, this petition is disposed of with direction to the petitioner to surrender before the Investigating Officer. The Investigating Officer, after interrogation, shall produce the petitioner before the authorities concerned, as per the procedure. P.S.GOPINATHAN JUDGE SU