IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN TUESDAY, THE 24TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 3RD AGRAHAYANA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 6859 of 2009() ----------------------------------- CRIME NO. 1116/2009 OF ERNAKULAM TOWN POLICE STATION (O.R.NO. 21/2009 OF KODANAD FOREST RANGE) PETITIONERS/ACCUSED: ------------------------------------- SUJITH, S/O. SURENDRAN, AGED 24 YEARS, KUNNAMBATH HOUSE, THENGUMTHARA, PUZHAMBALLAM DESOM, MARATHAKKARA VILLAGE, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH CHAKYAT RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANTS: ---------------------------------------------- 1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ERNAKULAM NORTH POLICE STATION, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. 2. THE RANGE OFFICER, KODANADU RANGE, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA. BY SRI. V. TEKCHAND PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 6859 of 2009 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 24th day of November, 2009 O R D E R This is an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner is accused No.6 in Crime No.1116/2009 of Ernakulam Town Police Station, which is now re-registered as O.R.No.21/2009 of Kodanad Forest Range. 2. The offence alleged against the petitioner are under Sections 2(16)(b)(c), 2(36), 39-B, 44(1)(c), 49, 51 and 52 of the Wild Life Protection Act. 3. On 17.06.2009, accused Nos.1 to 5 were arrested and they were found in possession of 0.5 ml of Snake venom. The prosecution case is that accused No.6 had supplied the said quantity of snake poison to accused No.5 as a sample and that large quantity is in the possession of accused No.6. 4. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature and gravity of the offence and the allegations levelled against the petitioner, I do not think that this is a fit B.A. No. 6859 of 2009 2 case where the discretionary relief under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure can be granted in favour of the petitioner. If Anticipatory Bail is granted to the petitioner, it would adversely affect the proper investigation of the case. For the aforesaid reasons, the Bail Application is dismissed. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE ln