Kerala High Court
Rajappan @ Parameswaran vs The State Of Kerala on 5 November, 2014
Author: B.Kemal Pasha
Bench: B.Kemal Pasha
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.KEMAL PASHA
WEDNESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2014/14TH KARTHIKA, 1936
Bail Appl..No. 7077 of 2014
-------------------------------
CRIME NO. 24/2014 OF PUDUR FOREST STATION IN
ATTAPADY FOREST RANGE, PALAKKAD
PETITIONER/ACCUSED:
-----------------------------------
RAJAPPAN @ PARAMESWARAN, AGED 45 YEARS
S/O. SUBBAYYA GOUNDER, ELACHIVAZHI, CHAVADIYOOR P.O.
MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.BABU S. NAIR
RESPONDENTS/STATE & COMPLAINANT:
--------------------------------------------------------------
1. THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR
HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI - 682 031.
2. THE FOREST RANGE OFFICER
ATTAPADY FOREST RANGE, PALAKKAD DISTRICT - 678 001.
R BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, SMT.LALIZA T.Y.
THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
05-11-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
B.KEMAL PASHA, J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - -
B.A.No.7077 of 2014
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - -
Dated this the 5th day of November, 2014
ORDER
Petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C.
2. Petitioner is the accused in Crime No.24/2014 of Pudur Forest Station in Attapady Forest Range, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 2(1), 2(16), 2(36), 9, 39(1)(b)(d) and 41 of the Wild Life Protection Act, 1972.
3. It is alleged that on 15.9.2014, a tusker came into contact with the fencing in the property of the petitioner, in which electricity from the main line was being passed, and thereby it became electrocuted.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor. The allegations against the petitioner is very grave and serious. The contents of the C.D. primafacie reveal the complicity of the petitioner. The investigation of the case is not over. Considering the seriousness of the allegations against the B.A.7077 of 2014 2 petitioner, and the present stage of investigation, I am of the view that the petitioner is not entitled to the discretionary relief of anticipatory bail. At the same time, if so advised, the petitioner may surrender before the investigating officer, within five days from today and co-operate with the investigation.
In the result, this Bail application is dismissed. If so advised, the petitioner may surrender before the investigating officer, within five days from today and co-operate with the investigation. After interrogation, without delay, he shall be produced before the jurisdictional Magistrate, and in such case, if advance notice is served on the Assistant Public Prosecutor in charge of the case, the learned Magistrate shall dispose of the application, if any filed, preferably on the same day itself.
Sd/-
B.KEMAL PASHA, JUDGE dl // TRUE COPY // PA to Judge