IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.P.RAY FRIDAY, THE 15TH JULY 2011 / 24TH ASHADHA 1933 Crl.MC.No. 2152 of 2011 ---------------------------------- [Crl.A.NO.22/1998 OF SESSIONS COURT, MANJERI, CC.NO.665/1995 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS COURT -II, (FOREST OFFENCES), MANJERI] .................... PETITIONER/ACCUSED: ---------------------------------- VASU, S/O.NAYADI, CHIRAYIL VEETTIL HOUSE, VENGARA P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.P.VENUGOPAL, SRI.M.REVIKRISHNAN. RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT: --------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, (REPRESENTING FOREST RANGE OFFICER, KALIKAVU, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, O.R.NO.7/1994). BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI. I.V. PRAMOD. THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: CRL.M.C. NO.2152/2011: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' ANNEXURES: ANNEXURE. A: COPY OF THE CHARGE SHEET PREFERRED BY THE FOREST RANGE OFFICER, KALIKAVU RANGE BEFORE THE JFCM COURT-II(FOREST OFFENCES) MANJERI IN O.S. NO.7/1994 (ALONG WITH ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION). ANNEXURE .B: COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT DTD. 28/01/1998 PASSED BY THE JFCM COURT-II (FOREST OFFENCES) MANJERI IN C.C. NO.665/1995. ANNEXURE .C: COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT DTD. 12/11/2002 PASSED BY THE COURT OF SESSIONS, MANJERI IN CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.22/1998. RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. B.P.RAY, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Crl.M.C.No.2152 OF 2011 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 15th day of July, 2011 ORDER Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. 2. Petitioner along with nine others were arrayed as accused in O.R.No.7/1994 of Karuvarakundu Forest Station under Kalikavu Range for the offences punishable under Sections 9(2), 17(1)(k) and 51 of the Wild Life (Protection) Act 1972 as amended by Act 44 of 1991. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that all the accused persons except the petitioner have been acquitted either by the learned Magistrate or by the appellate court on the ground that the skin of the porcupine was not preserved as directed by the Magistrate in the absence of the material object being produced in the court. Therefore the prosecution against the petitioner may be quashed. 3. I am not inclined to quash the prosecution against the petitioner at this stage. Due to non appearance of the petitioner, the case was delayed up and the trial was held for all of the other persons. Petitioner is ready and willing to surrender and go on bail. If the petitioner surrenders on or before 29th of this month and applies for bail in the aforementioned case, the Magistrate shall release him on bail on such terms and conditions he deems fit. Learned counsel Crl.M.C.No.2152 OF 2011 2 for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a business man and it may not be possible on his part to appear on each day of trial. If the petitioner files an application under Section 205 of Cr.P.C. for dispensing his personal appearance on the day fixed for trial, the Magistrate shall dispense with the personal appearance. If the petitioner also makes an application for discharge on the ground that no useful purpose will be served since all other accused persons are acquitted, learned Magistrate shall consider the same and pass appropriate order thereunder. Criminal M.C. is disposed of. B.P.RAY, JUDGE jes