IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 4TH MARCH 2010 / 13TH PHALGUNA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 871 of 2010 O.R.NO.27 OF 2009 OF KODANAD FOREST RANGE, ERNAKULAM PETITIONER/ACCUSED -------------------------------------- T.R.JEYESH, 29 YEARS, S/O.RAMANKUTTY NAIR, CHERUKUNNATH HOUSE, PERAMBRA P.O., CALICUT. BY ADV. SRI.T.M.MOHAMMED YOUSUFF, SENIOR ADVOCATE SMT.MOLLY JACOB SMT.U.M.FOUSIA SMT.RABIA BEEGAM T.K. SRI.JOBI.A.THAMPI SMT.M.KABANI DINESH SMT.BOBY M.SEKHAR SMT.FASHIYA YOUSEFF SMT.AYSHA YOUSEFF RESPONDENT: COMPLAINANT -------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY FOREST RANGE OFFICER, KODANAD P.O., ERNAKULAM. REPRESENTED BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.V.TEKCHAND THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ B.A. NO. 871 OF 2010 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 4th day of March, 2010 O R D E R The petitioner had filed B.A.No.6705 of 2009 praying for anticipatory bail in O.R.No.27 of 2009 of Kodanad Forest Range, Ernakulam District. That application was dismissed by the order dated 30.11.2009. This Bail Application is filed by the petitioner under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for the same relief which was prayed for in B.A.No.6705 of 2009. 2. For the sake of convenience, the order dated 30.11.2009 in B.A.No.6705 of 2009 is extracted below: “This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.7 in O.R.No.27 of 2009 of Kodanad Forest Range, Ernakulam District. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 2, 9, 39(1)(b), 39(1)(d), 39(2), 39(3)(a)(b) (c), 51 and 52 of the Wild Life Protection Act. B.A. NO. 871 OF 2010 :: 2 :: 3. The prosecution case is that on 12.9.2009, the forest officials intercepted a Tata Indigo car, bearing Registration No.KL56A-7029. On questioning the persons found in the car, it was revealed that they had come to Ernakulam to trade in leopard skin. It was also revealed that the leopard skin was available in a Toyota Innova car, bearing Registration No.KL 14E-6924. The forest officials tried to find out the car. Though they found out the car at Kadavanthra, Ernakulam, the persons who were in the car escaped. Leopard skin was also not found inside the car. However, hairs of leopard were found in the car. They were taken for analysis by the Expert. 4. The prosecution case is that the petitioner has active role and involvement in the offence alleged. If anticipatory bail is granted to the petitioner, it would certainly adversely affect the proper investigation of the case. There is no reason why the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure should be granted to the petitioner. In the nature of the allegations levelled against the petitioner, he is not entitled to any discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Application is dismissed.” B.A. NO. 871 OF 2010 :: 3 :: 3. I do not find any ground warranting interference in a second application for the same relief. 4. The learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that all other accused persons in the case were either arrested or they surrendered before Court and they were granted bail by the learned Magistrate. According to the learned counsel, this is an event which is relevant for consideration of the second application for anticipatory bail. I do not think that grant of regular bail to the other accused persons in the case is a ground for entertaining an application for anticipatory bail filed by the petitioner on the second occasion. There are no other grounds also justifying entertaining a second application. The learned senior counsel submitted that the petitioner is prepared to surrender before Court and to apply for regular bail. Nothing prevents the petitioner from surrendering and seeking for appropriate reliefs. The Bail Application is accordingly dismissed. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/