IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 6TH OCTOBER 2009 / 14TH ASWINA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 4879 of 2009() ------------------------------------ CRIME NO. 588/2009 OF VADAKKEKARA POLICE STATION .................... PETITIONERS/ACCUSED NOS .1 AND 2: ----------------------------------------------------- 1. SILVESTER, S/O.XAVIER, KAIMATHURUTHIL, KURUMBATHURUTH, GOTHURUTH, N.PARAVUR. 2. MANIKANDAN, S/O.HARIHARAN, KAPPITHANPARAMBIL, KURUMBATHURUTH, GOTHURUTH, N.PARAVUR. BY ADV. SRI.MANSOOR.B.H. RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: -------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTING - STATION HOUSE OFFICER, VADAKKEKARA POLICE STATION. BY SRI. V. TEKCHAND PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ln K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 4879 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 6th day of October, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioners are accused Nos.1 and 2 in Crime No.588/2009 of Vadakkekara Police Station, Ernakulam. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioners are under Sections 452, 323, 324, 354 and 308 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The prosecution case is the following: The accused persons attempted to trap a 'Barn Owl' in the premises of a church. The Vicar of the Church prohibited catching of Barn Owl from the church. Unauthorised possession of Barn owl is an offence under the Wild Life Protection Act. The defacto complainant prevented the accused persons from catching the Barn Owl. Infuriated by this, the accused persons committed the offence, in which, the defacto complainant and his brother, who had recently undergone surgery,sustained severe injuries. 4. In the nature of the allegations levelled against the B.A. No. 4879/2009 2 petitioners and taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not think that the petitioners are entitled to the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code. If the petitioners are released on bail, it would affect the smooth investigation of the case. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Application is dismissed. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE scm