IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 11TH JANUARY 2011 / 21ST POUSHA 1932 Crl.MC.No. 1591 of 2010() ------------------------- TO QUASH ANNEXURE-A3 FORM NO.1 REPORT AND FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN O.R.NO.32/2009 OF PARIYARAM FOREST RANGE PETITIONERS/ACCUSED 2 TO 7 AND 9 ----------------------------------- 1. REJEESH, AGED 21, S/O. RAMESH BABU, MANNALI PADINJAREYIL HOUSE, VALAYANAD, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 2. AKHIL KRISHNA, AGED 19, S/O. T.K. PRASAD, SREELAYAM, VATTOLITHAZHAM, VALAYANADU VILLAGE, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 3. AMJATH, AGED 22, S/O. LATHEEF, KUNATHPARAMBIL, PUTHIYAPALAM, KOTTOLI VILLAGE, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 4. JISHAD, AGED 22, S/O. ABDULLA, THENATH HOUSE, MANKAVU, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 5. IBRAHIM, AGED 21, S/O. ISMAIL, KATTAYAD HOUSE, CHERUPADI, KODIYATHUR VILLAGE, ERNAD TALUK. 6. GIREESH, AGED 2, S/O. RAMACHANDRAN, THEKKETHIL HOUSE, MANKAVU, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 7. PRAJEESH, AGED 23, S/O. GOVINDANKUTTY, METHALAKKAKAM PARAMB HOUSE, KONDOTTY.P.O, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEW KURIAKOSE RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT AND STATE ------------------------------------ 1. FOREST RANGE OFFICER, PARIYARAM FOREST RANGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA (O.R 32/2009 OF PARIYARAM FOREST RANGE) REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR: ADV. SRI. K J MOHAMMED ANSARI THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOMAS P JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------- Crl.M.C.No.1591 of 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated this 11th day of January, 2011 ORDER Petitioners are accused Nos.2 to 7 and 9 in Annexure-A3, form No.1 report submitted by the respondent in O.R.No.32 of 2009 of Pariyaram Forest Range Office. Petitioners are accused of offences punishable under Secs.2(5), 2(11), 9, 39, 50 and 51 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972. Case is that petitioners illegally captured snakes and extracted venom. Learned counsel contends that the only allegation against petitioners is that they possessed snake venom but, Annexure-B, report says that the seized sample did not contain any snake venom toxin. According to the Public Prosecutor investigation of the case is not complete and that Annexure-B, report only state the sample was not sufficient to disclose whether it contained venom toxin. 2. After arguing the matter for some time learned counsel for petitioners sought permission to withdraw the petition without prejudice to the right of petitioners to challenge the final report if any in appropriate proceedings. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case I am inclined to grant leave. Crl.M.C.No.1591 of 2010 -: 2 :- Resultantly this petition is dismissed as withdrawn without prejudice to the right of petitioners to challenge the final report if any, filed against them in the matter before the appropriate forum. (THOMAS P JOSEPH, JUDGE) Sbna/-