IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 20TH OCTOBER 2008 / 28TH ASWINA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 6063 of 2008() ----------------------------- O.R.NO.4/2008 OF OLAVAKKODE FOREST RANGE OFFICE, PALAKKAD .................... PETITIONERS (S): ACCUSED 3 -5 -------------------------------- 1. JINTO, S/O. SEBASTIAN, AGED 32 YEARS, ARPATHANATHU HOUSE, NOCHUPULY POST, PALAKKAD. 2. SANTOSH, S/O. RAJAN, AGED 19 YEARS, PAZHAMPULLY, PAYALAMKUNNU, DHONI, PALAKKAD. 3. KANNAN @ ANEESH, S/O. CHINNA, AGED 19 YEARS, EMS NAGAR, DHONI, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE MATHEW SRI.SUNIL KUMAR A.G RESPONDENT(S): COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY FOREST RANGE OFFICER, OLAVAKKODE THROUGH PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ------------------------------------------------- B.A.No.6063 of 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of October, 2008 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. The alleged offences are under Sections 27(1)(e)(iii) and (iv) of Kerala Forest Act. According to prosecution, petitioners along with two others removed a venga tree which had allegedly cut down from a forest. The first and the second accused were arrested from the spot. But, the petitioners, who are accused nos. 3 to 5, ran away from the spot. 3. This is the second application for bail. The contentions raised by the petitioners were already considered in the earlier application for anticipatory bail. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that there were cases and counter cases between the petitioners and the Forest Officials earlier and hence, the Forest Officials are motivated against the petitioners. This fact was not brought to the notice of this Court as per the earlier application for bail, since instructions on this aspect were not given. It is also submitted that the petitioners will not be required for identification because the Forest Officials know the petitioners and hence, anticipatory bail may be granted. 4. Learned public prosecutor submitted that there is no BA No.6063/08 2 change in circumstances and the petitioners could not be arrested so far, though the incident happened as early as on 27.7.2008. Petition after petition is being filed for anticipatory bail, without subjecting themselves to interrogation by the Forest Officials. Hence, it is not fit to grant anticipatory bail, it is submitted. 5. On hearing both sides, I am satisfied that there is no change of circumstances. The omission to bring to the notice of this Court, which was in existence, even to the filing of the petition, cannot be taken as a change of circumstance. Even with respect to the said fact, though numbers are given in petition, there is only oral assertions and no documents. The crime was registered about three months back and the petitioners could not be arrested so far. Therefore, it is necessary that a direction is issued to the petitioners to surrender before the Investigating Officer and co- operate with the investigation. Or else, this Court will be failing in its duty. Hence, petitioners are directed to surrender before the Investigating Officer within seven days from today and co-operate with the investigation. With this direction, this petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE csl