High Court Kerala High Court

Thankachan vs The Forest Range Officer on 21 January, 2011

Kerala High Court
Thankachan vs The Forest Range Officer on 21 January, 2011
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

Bail Appl..No. 147 of 2011()


1. THANKACHAN, AGED 43 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE FOREST RANGE OFFICER,
                       ...       Respondent

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.G.SURESH

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice V.RAMKUMAR

 Dated :21/01/2011

 O R D E R
                          V. RAMKUMAR, J.
            ---------------------------------------------------
                Bail Application No.147 of 2011
            ----------------------------------------------------
            Dated this the 21st day of January, 2011

                                 ORDER

Petitioner, who is accused No.1 in O.R.No.4 of 2010 of

Palappilly Forest Range, Thrissur, for offences punishable under

Sections 27(1)(e)(iv),(iii) and 27(I) (d) of Kerala Forest Act 1961

(Amendment Act 1993), seeks anticipatory bail.

2. The learned Public Prosecutor opposed the

application.

3. After evaluating the factors and parameters which

are to be taken into consideration in the light of paragraph 122

of the verdict dated 2-12-2010 of the Apex Court in Siddharam

Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra and Others

(2010 (4) KLT 930), I am of the view that anticipatory bail

cannot be granted in a case of this nature, since the

investigating officer has not had the advantage of interrogating

the petitioner. But at the same time, I am inclined to permit the

petitioner to surrender before the Investigating Officer for the

purpose of interrogation and then to have his application for bail

B.A.No.147/2011 -:2:-

considered by the Magistrate or the Court having jurisdiction.

Accordingly, the petitioner shall surrender before the

investigating officer on 01/02/2011 or on 02/02/2011 for

the purpose of interrogation and recovery of incriminating

material, if any. In case the investigating officer is of the view

that having regard to the facts of the case arrest of the

petitioner is imperative he shall record his reasons for the arrest

in the case-diary as insisted in paragraph 129 of Siddharam

Satlingappa Mhetre’s case (supra). The petitioner shall

thereafter be produced before the Magistrate or the Court

concerned and permitted to file an application for regular bail.

In case the interrogation of the petitioner is without arresting

him, the petitioner shall thereafter appear before the Magistrate

or the Court concerned and apply for regular bail on the same

day or the next day. The Magistrate or the Court on being

satisfied that the petitioner has been interrogated by the police

shall, after hearing the prosecution as well, consider and

dispose of his application for regular bail preferably on

the same date on which it is filed.

B.A.No.147/2011 -:3:-

4. In case the petitioner while surrendering before the

Investigating Officer has deprived the investigating officer

sufficient time for interrogation, the officer shall complete the

interrogation even if it is beyond the time limit fixed as above

and submit a report to that effect to the Magistrate or the

Court concerned. Likewise, the Magistrate or the Court also

will not be bound by the time limit fixed as above if sufficient

time was not available after the production or appearance of

the petitioner.

This petition is disposed of as above.

V.RAMKUMAR, JUDGE

skj