IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT MONDAY, THE 7TH APRIL 2008 / 18TH CHAITHRA 1930 Bail Appl..No. 1955 of 2008() ----------------------------- O.R.NO.7/08 OF FOREST RANGE OFFICER, KOTTIYOOR PETITIONER : 5TH ACCUSED --------------------------- BABU @ AMBALAM BABU @ JOSEPH AGED 30 YEARS,S/O.JOSE AMBALAKKUNNEL HOUSE, ULIKKAL P.O.,KANNUR BY ADV. SRI.BLAZE K.JOSE RESPONDENTS: COMPLAINANT ------------- STATE OF KERALA REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA REPRESENTING FOREST RANGE OFFICER, KOTTIYOOR BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.S.U.NAZAR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/04/2008 ALONG WITH B.A.NO.2120 OF 2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R.BASANT, J ------------------------------------ B.A.Nos.1955 and 2120 of 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 7th day of April, 2008 ORDER These applications are for anticipatory bail. The common petitioner apprehends arrest in a crime registered by the forest officials under the Wild Life Protection Act as also by the police under the provisions of the Arms Act. The petitioner is the 5th accused in both the cases. The crux of the allegation is that the petitioner had dropped the miscreants near the forest. Those miscreants had allegedly trespassed into the forest. They allegedly had attempted to shoot down animals. A gun was also available with them. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that admittedly the petitioner was not along with miscreants when the offence was detected. The gravamen of the allegation is that it was the petitioner who dropped them at a place nearby. From there the miscreants proceeded to the scene of the crime. In any view of the matter for trespass committed by the miscreants or the possession of any arm by such persons, the petitioner cannot be mulcted with liability. The petitioner is in no way connected with the crime. Even going by the allegation, long prior to the alleged occurrence, the petitioner had only dropped the miscreants near the scene of the crime. In these circumstances, B.A.Nos.1955 and 2120 of 2008 2 it is prayed that a lenient view may be taken and the petitioner may be released on bail in both the cases. 3. The learned Public Prosecutor does not oppose the application. The learned Public Prosecutor confirms that the only allegation against the petitioner is that he had transported the miscreants to a place near the scene of the crime. He had thereafter gone away from the scene. 4. Having considered all the relevant inputs, I am persuaded to agree that these are fit cases in which the direction under Section 438 Cr.P.C can and deserves to be invoked, subject of course to appropriate conditions which shall ensure the interests of a fair efficient and expeditious investigation. 5. In the result, this Bail Application is, allowed. The following directions are issued under Section 438 Cr.P.C. i) The petitioner shall appear before the learned Magistrate at 11 a.m on 15.04.2008. He shall be enlarged on regular bail in each case on his executing bonds for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) with two solvent sureties each for the like sum to the satisfaction of the learned Magistrate; ii) The petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer in Crime 7 of 2008 between 10 a.m and 5 p.m on 16.04.2008 and on 17.04.08 in B.A.Nos.1955 and 2120 of 2008 3 Crime 38 of 2008 between 10 a.m and 5 p.m. During this period, the Investigating Officer shall be at liberty to interrogate the petitioner in custody and take all necessary steps the proper conduct of the investigation. Thereafter The petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer between 10 a.m and 12 noon on all Mondays in Crime 7 of 2008 and on all Fridays in Crime 38 of 2008 for a period of two months. Subsequently the petitioner shall make himself available for interrogation before the Investigating Officer as and when directed by the Investigating Officer in writing to do so; iii) If the petitioner does not appear before the learned Magistrate as directed in clause (i), directions issued above shall thereafter stand revoked and the police shall be at liberty to arrest the petitioner and deal with him in accordance with law as if those directions were not issued at all; iv) If the petitioner were arrested prior to his surrender on 15.04.08 as directed in clause (1) above, he shall be released from custody on his executing a bond for Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) without any sureties undertaking to appear before the learned Magistrate on 15.04.08. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) rtr/-