Allowed

Zeenath v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC13 Aug 2019Bail Appl./5708/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court at Ernakulam allowed bail applications of accused persons charged with forest offences under the Kerala Forest Act. The court held that custodial interrogation was unnecessary given the facts and granted pre-arrest bail on specific conditions.

What did the court decide?

Granted pre-arrest bail on the condition of executing a bond for Rs.40,000 with two solvent sureties each, and surrendering within ten days.

Zeenath Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF AUGUST 2019 / 22ND SRAVANA, 1941

¶5

Bail Appl..No.5704 OF 2019

¶6

O.R. NO.9/2019 OF Ottapalam Forest Range, Palakkad

¶7

PETITIONER/S/4TH ACCUSED:

¶8

SUBAIR

¶9

AGED 32 YEARS, S/O. MOIDEEN, PUNNEKKATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE, KIZHAKKUMPURAM P.O, MANNUR, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.P.JAYARAM

¶11

RESPONDENT/S/RESPONDENT:

¶12

STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBILC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682 031

¶13

SRI.C.S.HRITHWIK,PP

¶14

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.08.2019, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..5708/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

¶16

Bail Appl..Nos.5704 and 5708 OF 2019

¶17

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶18

PRESENT

¶19

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR

¶20

TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF AUGUST 2019 / 22ND SRAVANA, 1941

¶21

Bail Appl..No.5708 OF 2019

¶22

O.R. NO.9/2019 OF Ottapalam Forest Range Office , Palakkad

¶23

PETITIONER/S/3RD ACCUSED:

¶24

ZEENATH

¶25

AGED 45 YEARS, W/O.MUHAMMADKUTTY, KUNNATHUKULAM VEEDU, MULANJOOR.P.O., OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

¶26

BY ADV. SRI.P.JAYARAM

¶27

RESPONDENT/S/RESPONDENTS:

¶28

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-682031.

¶29

SRI.C.S.HRITHWIK,PP

¶30

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.08.2019, ALONG WITH Bail Appl..5704/2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶31

¶32

Bail Appl..Nos.5704 and 5708 OF 2019

¶33

O R D E R

¶34

The petitioners are accused Nos. 3 and 4 in O.R. No. 9 of

¶35

2019 of Ottapalam Forest Range, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 47(G) and Section 27 (1), (e), (iii) and (iv) of the Kerala Forest Act.

¶36

The petitioners have filed this application under Section 438 Cr.P.C.

¶37

Heard.

¶38

The prosecution allegation is that the first and the

¶39

second accused in the crime cut and removed one sandal tree

¶40

from a quarry. Thereafter, the logs were loaded in a scooter.

¶41

The first and the second accused stood on the side of the road

¶42

along with the scooter. On seeing the forest officials, the second accused ran away from the scene. The first accused

¶43

was arrested from the spot. From the disclosure statement of

¶44

the first accused, the involvement of the second accused was

¶45

¶46

Bail Appl..Nos.5704 and 5708 OF 2019

¶47

revealed. Thereafter, the second accused was arrested. The fourth accused was the person to whom the logs were intended to be sold. The third accused is the wife of the first accused. It appears that A3 and A4 were not involved in the cutting of the sandal tree from the quarry. The learned Public Prosecutor has submitted that the sandal tree was not cut from the forest. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the view that the custodial interrogation of the petitioners is not necessary for the progress of investigation of the case. In the said circumstances, I am inclined to grant prearrest bail to the petitioners.

¶48

In the result, these applications stand allowed and the respondent is directed to release the petitioners on bail in the event of their arrest in O.R.No.9 of 2019 of Ottapalam Forest Range, on condition of each of the petitioners executing a bond for Rs.40,000/-(Rupees forty thousand only) each, with two solvent sureties each, each for the like sum to the satisfaction

¶49

¶50

Bail Appl..Nos.5704 and 5708 OF 2019

¶51

of the Forest Range Officer concerned, before whom the petitioners shall surrender within ten days, if not arrested in the meantime and subject to the following further conditions:

¶52

(i) The petitioners shall report before the

¶53

Investigating Officer as and when required by the Investigating Officer for interrogation.

¶54

(ii) The petitioners shall not intimidate or

¶55

influence the witnesses or in any way

¶56

tamper with the investigation.

¶57

(iii) The petitioners shall not get involved in

¶58

any other offence during the pendency of this

¶59

case.

¶60

Sd/-

¶61

B.SUDHEENDRA KUMAR

¶62

JUDGE

¶63

RK/13.08.2019

Zeenath v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Zeenath 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

Remesh Vs State of Kerala

Kuttappan Vs State of Kerala

Sudheesh @ Sudhi Vs State of Kerala

Ahmed Riyas, Vs State of Kerala

Sajeermon, Vs the State of Kerala

K.a.Sabu, Vs State of Kerala