High Court Kerala High Court

Abdul Rehiman vs State Of Kerala on 14 October, 2008

Kerala High Court
Abdul Rehiman vs State Of Kerala on 14 October, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 6289 of 2008()



1. ABDUL REHIMAN
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA

 Dated :14/10/2008

 O R D E R
                           K.HEMA, J.

               -----------------------------------------
                     B.A.No. 6289 of 2008
               -----------------------------------------

             Dated this the 14th October, 2008

                            O R D E R

This petition is for anticipatory bail.

2. The alleged offence is under Section 27(1)(e)(iii) and

(iv) of the Kerala Forest Act. According to prosecution, the

petitioner, along with the first accused, had gone in an auto

rickshaw for the purpose of cutting a Sandalwood tree. The

auto rickshaw was found parked by the side of the forest and

the driver was found in the forest and on questioning, it is

revealed that the petitioner had gone inside the forest to cut

the Sandalwood. On examination, it was found that a

Sandalwood tree was cut, but the petitioner could not be

arrested.

3. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that the

petitioner is absolutely innocent of the allegations made. The

prosecution is only creating a story of cutting a Sandalwood

tree. The tree allegedly cut is only worth Rs.1,000/-, even

according to prosecution. The said tree cannot be used for any

purpose for which Sandalwood is used. It is also submitted

BA.5381/08 2

that the petitioner could not be traced out in the forest, even

according to the prosecution case. He was at that time present

in the hospital along with his wife as evidenced by the medical

certificate issued from the hospital, which is marked as

Annexure-A. It is also submitted that the only material to

connect the petitioner with the offence is the statement

allegedly given by the first accused, who is an auto rickshaw

driver.

4. This petition is opposed. Learned Public Prosecutor

submitted that the petitioner is required for investigation and

the offence alleged is of serious nature. The petitioner is

actually involved in the crime as stated by the first accused.

5. On hearing both sides, it is clear that the only material

available to connect the petitioner with the crime is the

statement given by the first accused. The Sandalwood tree

allegedly cut is only worth Rs.1,000/-, which means, the tree

must be very small one. Though I am not inclined at this stage

to rely upon Annexure-A to support the plea of alibi, on the

facts and circumstances of the case, I think it fit to grant

anticipatory bail on conditions.

BA.5381/08 3

Hence, the following order is passed:

Petitioner shall surrender before the

investigating officer within seven days from today and

make himself available for interrogation and co-

operate with the investigation and in the event of his

arrest, he shall be released on bail on his executing a

bond for Rs.25,000/- with two solvent sureties each for

the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting officer,

on the following conditions:

i) Petitioner shall report before the

investigating officer as and when

directed.

ii) Petitioner shall co-operate with the

investigation.

iii) Petitioner shall not commit any offence

while on bail.

Petition is allowed.

K.HEMA, JUDGE
vgs.