High Court Kerala High Court

K.Raghavan vs The Sub Inspector Of Police on 31 October, 2008

Kerala High Court
K.Raghavan vs The Sub Inspector Of Police on 31 October, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 5651 of 2008()


1. K.RAGHAVAN, S/O. KRISHNAN, BILL
                      ...  Petitioner
2. P.HARIDASAN, S/O. ACHUTHAN,
3. P.MOHANDAS, S/O. ACHUTHAN, AGRICULTURIST
4. P.RAJAN, S/O. ACHUTHAN, BUS CLEANER,DO
5. VACHALI PREMAN, S/O. KUNHIRAMAN,
6. THENIYADAN VINODAN, S/O. VIJAYAN,

                        Vs



1. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
                       ...       Respondent

2. STATE REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MRS. Justice K.HEMA

 Dated :31/10/2008

 O R D E R
                             K.HEMA, J.
                  ---------------------------------------------
                         B.A.No.5651 of 2008
                  ---------------------------------------------
             Dated this the 31st day of October, 2008


                                O R D E R

This petition is for anticipatory bail.

2. According to prosecution, petitioners, six in number,

formed into an unlawful assembly and wrongfully restrained the

Forest Officials. They came for seizing the meat of wild pig,

which was kept behind the house of first accused. The defacto

complainant, who is a Forest Official, was wrongfully restrained

and criminal force was used for deterring him from discharging

his official duty as a public servant. The incident occurred on

10.8.2008.

3. Learned counsel for petitioners submitted that

petitioners are falsely implicated. They are residing close to the

forest and wild animals are attacking their houses. Hence,

several complaints were made to the Forest Officials to do

something in the matter. Because of this, Forest Officials had

enmity towards the people of the locality and they falsely

implicated A1 to A6 in an offence of this nature.

4. This petition is opposed. Learned public prosecutor

submitted that this is a clear case where criminal force was used

BA No.5651/2008 2

against the Forest Officials to deter them from discharging the

official duty and another case was registered for hunting the

wild pig etc. and this is not a fit case to grant anticipatory bail.

The pig-meat which was kept in a bucket in the back side of A1’s

house were thrown to a stream, on seeing the officials and they

were restrained when an attempt was made to seize the meat.

Only a very small portion could be seized.

5. On hearing both sides, I find that in an offence of this

nature, considering nature of allegations made, it is not proper

to grant anticipatory bail. The incident occurred as early as on

10.8.2008 and for the past more than 2= months, petitioners

were not available for arrest or investigation.

Hence, petitioners are directed to surrender before

the Investigating Officer or before the learned

Magistrate within ten days from today and co-operate

with the investigation.

With this direction, this petition is dismissed.

K.HEMA, JUDGE
csl