Loading...
Responsive image

Kodali Kunhumuhammed vs The State Of Kerala Represented By … on 22 November, 2007

Kerala High Court
Kodali Kunhumuhammed vs The State Of Kerala Represented By … on 22 November, 2007
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl No. 6859 of 2007()


1. KODALI KUNHUMUHAMMED, AGED 71 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.BABU S. NAIR

                For Respondent  :PUBLIC PROSECUTOR

The Hon'ble MR. Justice R.BASANT

 Dated :22/11/2007

 O R D E R
                          R. BASANT, J.
            -------------------------------------------------
                     B.A. No.6859 OF 2007
            -------------------------------------------------
        Dated this the 22nd day of November, 2007

                               ORDER

Application for anticipatory bail. The petitioner faces

allegations under the Kerala Forest Act. On receipt of discreet

information, the officials of the Forest Department conducted

the search of a residential premises occupied by the widowed

sister of the petitioner herein. 140 Kgs. of sandal wood

freshly/recently collected from the forest were found concealed

in the premises in gunny bags. The investigation suggested to

the officials that the sandal pieces were kept in the premises

by the petitioner and his son. Accordingly, a crime has been

registered. The petitioner and his son have been shown as

accused 1 and 2. Investigation is in progress. The officials

have not been able to arrest the petitioner or his son so far.

The petitioner apprehends imminent arrest.

B.A. No.6859 OF 2007 -: 2 :-

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

petitioner is absolutely innocent. He is old, sick and infirm.

Recovery was not effected from his house. There is also a

submission at the Bar that the petitioner is mentally ill. In these

circumstances, directions under Sec.438 of the Cr.P.C. may be

issued in favour of the petitioner, prays the learned counsel for

the petitioner.

3. The learned Public Prosecutor opposes the application.

The Case Diary has been placed before me for my perusal. I

have perused the same. The indications reveal that though the

house belongs to the widowed sister of the petitioner, the

petitioner and his son used to frequently visit the said house.

At the moment and with the available inputs, I find no

circumstances which can justify or warrant the invocation of the

extraordinary equitable discretion under Sec.438 of the Cr.P.C.

This, I agree with the learned Public Prosecutor, is a fit case

where the petitioner must appear before the Investigating

Officer or the learned Magistrate having jurisdiction and then

seek regular bail in the ordinary course.

4. In the result, this bail application is dismissed; but with

the observation that if the petitioner surrenders before the

Investigating Officer or the learned Magistrate and seeks bail,

B.A. No.6859 OF 2007 -: 3 :-

after giving sufficient prior notice to the Prosecutor in charge of

the case, the learned Magistrate must proceed to pass

appropriate orders on merits and expeditiously.

Sd/-

(R. BASANT, JUDGE)

Nan/

//true copy//

P.S. to Judge

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies. More Information