IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN MONDAY, THE 15TH MARCH 2010 / 24TH PHALGUNA 1931 Bail Appl..No. 1037 of 2010() ---------------------------------- O.R.NO. 2/2010 OF ANCHAL FOREST RANGE ........................ PETITIONERS/ACCUSED : ----------------------------- 1. ABDUL NAZAR, S/O.SHAHUL HAMEED, 'ALIF DAYAL', ALAMCODE P.O., ATTINGAL. 2. NOUSHAD, S/O.ABDUL VAHID, NEETHU NIVAS, NEAR MUNICIPAL OFFICE, ATTINGAL. BY ADV. SRI.M.SREEKUMAR RESPONDENTS/COMPLAINANT & STATE : ------------------------------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. 2. FOREST RANGE OFFICER, ANCHAL FOREST RANGE, ANCHAL. BY SRI. I.V.PRAMOD PUBLIC PROSECUTOR THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.T. SANKARAN, J. --------------------------- B.A. No. 1037 of 2010 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 15th day of March, 2010 O R D E R When the Bail Application came up for hearing on 24.02.2010, the following order was passed: The petitioners apprehend arrest in OR No.2 of 2010 of Anchal Forest Range. 2. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the crime was registered under Section 27(1)(e) of the Kerala Forest Act. The allegation is that a small pathway was converted into a 3 mtr. wide pathway up to a length of 60 mtrs. through the reserve forest. The property belonging to the petitioners are situated on the side of the pathway. Therefore, the investigating officer wanted to ascertain whether the petitioners are involved in the offence. A notice was issued to the petitioners to appear before the investigating officer. The petitioners did not appear. They rushed to the High Court under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that as of now, the petitioners are not made accused. Only if it is seen that they are involved in the offence, they will be B.A. No. 1037 / 2010 2 made accused in the case. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are prepared to co-operate with the investigation and that they are prepared to disclose all the relevant facts. 3. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that before disposing of the Bail Application, an opportunity should be given to the petitioners to appear before the investigating officer. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the petitioners to appear before the investigating officer at 9 A.M. on 4th and 5th March 2010. The petitioners shall produce copy of the order before the investigating officer. 4. Post on 11th March, 2010. It is submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioners will not be arrested until further orders in connection with OR No.2 of 2010 of Anchal Forest Range. The question whether the petitioners are entitled to any relief in the application for anticipatory bail will be considered on the basis of the outcome of the appearance of the petitioners on 4th and 5th March, 2010.” B.A. No. 1037 / 2010 3 2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Public Prosecutor that the petitioners have complied with the direction contained in the order dated 24.02.2010. 3. Taking into account the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the offence and other circumstances, I am of the view that anticipatory bail can be granted to the petitioners. There will be a direction that in the event of the arrest of the petitioners, the officer in charge of the police station shall release them on bail on their executing bond for Rs. 15,000/- each with two solvent sureties for the like amount to the satisfaction of the officer concerned, subject to the following conditions: A) The petitioners shall report before the investigating officer between 9 A.M and 11 A.M. on alternate Mondays, till the final report is filed or until further orders; B) The petitioners shall appear before the investigating officer for interrogation as and when required; C) The petitioners shall not try to influence the prosecution witnesses or tamper with the evidence. D) The petitioners shall not commit any offence or indulge in any prejudicial activity while on bail. B.A. No. 1037 / 2010 4 E) In case of breach of any of the conditions mentioned above, the bail shall be liable to be cancelled. The Bail Application is allowed to the extent indicated above. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE ln