Dismissed

Asokan v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC2 Aug 2012Bail Appl./5232/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner seeking anticipatory bail for alleged forest encroachment and tree cutting. Court denied bail due to offence gravity, directing surrender before Forest Range Officer for statement recording before bail determination by magistrate.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail dismissed; petitioner directed to surrender to Forest Range Officer for statement recording before magistrate bail hearing.

Asokan Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.K.BALAKRISHNAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF AUGUST 2012/11TH SRAVANA 1934

¶5

Bail Appl..No. 5232 of 2012 () ------------------------------

¶6

O.R.NO:6/2012 OF ADIMALY FOREST RANGE, IDUKKI DISTRICT

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

ASOKAN, AGED 35 YEARS S/O.KUNJU, KUMBALAM PUZHAYIL HOUSE, MUNIYARA, VALLAKKADAVU KARA, KONNATHADI VILLAGE, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN

¶10

COMPLAINANT(S):

¶11

1. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA

¶12

2. THE FOREST RANGE OFFICER, ADIMALI FOREST RANGE OFFICE, IDUKKI DISTRICT

¶13

BY PUBLIC PROSECUTOR SRI.SREEJITH V.S.

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02-08-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, J.

¶16

B.A. No: 5232 of 2012

¶17

Dated this the 2^nd day of August, 2012

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

The petitioner is the 2^nd accused in O.R. No:6/2012 of

¶20

Adimaly Forest Range, Idukki District. The offences alleged are under sections 27(1)(e)(iii) & (iv) of Kerala Forest Act. Apprehending arrest, this petition is filed for anticipatory bail.

¶21

It is alleged that this accused and other accused

¶22

persons trespassed into the forest which is described as '1965 Ponnmudi Teak Plantation', Adimali Forest Range, and cut and removed teak trees using a saw. It was sawn into pieces and removed from the forest. The 1^st accused was arrested and his statement was recorded. It could be found that he and this petitioner and others trespassed into the forest and removed the teak trees, mentioned above, after

¶23

having sawn into pieces.

¶24

B.A. No: 5232/2012

¶25

-2-

¶26

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

¶27

it is purely based on the statement of the 1^st accused, this petitioner has been arrayed as accused. But the learned Public Prosecutor submits that sufficient materials are there to show the complicity of this petitioner.

¶28

Considering the gravity of the offence, I am not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to this petitioner. This application is hence dismissed.

¶29

If the petitioner surrenders before the Forest Range Officer, after questioning and recording his statement/confession statement, he shall be produced before the learned Magistrate. The learned Magistrate will then dispose of his application for bail in accordance with law, without delay.

¶30

Sd/N.K. BALAKRISHNAN, JUDGE

¶31

//True Copy//

¶32

P.A. to Judge

¶33

jjj

Asokan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Asokan v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Radha Vs Excise Inspector

Jijoy Vs State of Kerala

Karuthan Ponnaiya Vs Senior Intelligence Officer

P.B.Rajeev Vs the State of Kerala

Santha Vs State of Kerala

Shaiju Vs State of Kerala