IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA MONDAY, THE 24TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 7059 of 2008() ----------------------------- OCCURRENCE REPORT NO.26/08 OF KULATHUPUZHA FOREST RANGE PETITIONER(S): -------------------- 1. BABURAJ, BLOCK NO.68, CHALLIMUKKU, PERINGMALA VILLAGE, NEDUMANGADU. 2. PRASAD, THADATHAMKATHU VEEDU, SOCIETY MUKKU, CHITHARA, 3. SHIBU, THADATHAMKKATHU VEEDU, SOCIETY MUKKU, CHITHARA. 4. ANIL, THADATHAMKKATU VEEDU, SOCIETY MUKKU, CHITHARA. BY ADV. SRI.V.PREMCHAND RESPONDENT(S): --------------- THE FOREST RANGE OFFICER, KULATHUPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, AT ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SHRI.K.S.SIVAKUMAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.HEMA, J. ----------------------------------------- B.A.No.7059 of 2008 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th November, 2008 O R D E R This petition is for anticipatory bail. 2. According to prosecution, petitioners (accused 6 and 8 to 10), along with other accused, committed various offences under Section 27(1)(e)(iii) and (iv) of the Kerala Forest Act. They cut and removed three teak trees from the forest. 3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that petitioners are accused 6 to 9. They have not committed any offence, but, their names are falsely implicated by the co- accused, who are arrested, due to political enmity. Hence, they may be granted anticipatory bail, it is submitted. 4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that petitioners are accused 6 and 8 to 10. Accused 1 to 5 were arrested and on questioning them, it is revealed that the trees were cut and removed by accused 6 to 10. Petitioners are required for custodial interrogation and it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail, it is submitted. BA.7059/08 2 5. On hearing both sides, considering the nature of offence committed, I find that it is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail. Petitioners will be required for custodial interrogation and for purpose of investigation. If they are granted anticipatory bail, it is likely that it will adversely affect the investigation. Petitioners have only bare assertions of their innocence. The crime was registered as early as on 29.10.2008 and petitioners were not available for interrogation. Petitioners are directed to surrender before the investigating officer and co-operate with the investigation. Whether they surrender or not, police is at liberty to arrest them at any time and proceed in accordance with law. With this direction, petition is dismissed. K.HEMA, JUDGE vgs.