Allowed

Kunhiraman K., v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC7 Jul 2020Bail Appl./2963/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court granted anticipatory bail to a third accused facing charges under the Kerala Forest Act. The accused surrendered and committed to cooperating with the investigation. Bail was granted subject to conditions including a bond amount.

What did the court decide?

Accused directed to surrender within two weeks; bail on execution of bond for Rs.50,000 with two sureties on conditions of cooperation and appearance.

Kunhiraman K., Vs State of Kerala — Bail and Remand | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 07TH DAY OF JULY 2020 / 16TH ASHADHA, 1942

¶5

Bail Appl..No.2963 OF 2020

¶6

O.R. NO.3/2020 OF Kasaragod Forest Range Office , Kasargod

¶7

PETITIONER/A3:

¶8

KUNHIRAMAN K., AGED 44 YEARS S/O.KANNAN, RESIDING AT CHAMBAKKAD, BEDADUKKA VILLAGE AND POST, KASARAGOD TALUK, KASARAGOD DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADVS. SRI.T.MADHU SMT.C.R.SARADAMANI

¶10

RESPONDENTS/STATE:

¶11

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

¶12

2 THE FOREST RANGE OFFICER, KASARAGOD FOREST RANGE OFFICE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT671123.

¶13

OTHER PRESENT:

¶14

SRI. AMJAD ALI. SR PP

¶15

THIS BAIL APPLICATION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.07.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

Bail Appl..No.2963 OF 2020

¶17

¶18

This is an application for anticipatory bail.

¶19

The petitioner is the 3^rd accused in O.R.No.3/2020 of Kasaragod Forest Range for having allegedly committed the offences punishable under Sections 27 and 35B of the Kerala Forest Act. The prosecution case in brief is that on 01.03.2020 at about 5.30 PM the accused 1 and 2 were apprehended at Maruthadukkam, within the limits of Kasaragod Forest Range and they were found to be in possession of 3.2 kgs. of sandal wood pieces, which was cut and removed from the forest property at Kuttiyanam. They were immediately apprehended and remanded to judicial custody. They gave confession statement regarding the involvement of the petitioner and some others and in consequence of which, they were also impleaded as accused. The petitioner submits that he is innocent and he has absolutely nothing to do with the alleged crime. He has no criminal antecedents and he has been falsely implicated.

¶20

Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶21

Bail Appl..No.2963 OF 2020

¶22

¶23

The learned Public Prosecutor submits that the stump of the sandal wood tree, which was cut and removed was also discovered on the basis of the statements given by accused 1 and 2.

¶24

The petitioner admittedly has no criminal antecedents. The sandal wood allegedly cut and transported by accused 1 and 2 have already been recovered. Therefore, no further recovery is to be made, and hence, custodial interrogation is found to be not essential. The petitioner is willing to co-operate with the investigation. Hence, the petitioner is directed to surrender before the Investigating Officer within two weeks and in the event of his being arrested, he shall be released on bail on execution of bond for Rs.50,000/-(Rupees fifty thousand only), with two solvent sureties each for the like amount to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer, and on the following conditions:

¶25

(i) He shall co-operate with the investigation; (ii) He shall not influence or intimidate witnesses or tamper with evidence;

¶26

(iii) He shall appear before the investigating Officer as and when called for, for the purpose of interrogation; and

¶27

(iv) During the bail period, he shall not get involved in

¶28

Bail Appl..No.2963 OF 2020

¶29

¶30

any similar offences.

¶31

In case of breach of the bail conditions, the prosecution shall be at liberty to apply for cancellation of the bail before the jurisdictional court.

¶32

Sd/-

¶33

dkr

¶34

ASHOK MENON JUDGE

Kunhiraman K., v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kunhiraman K., 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

Sanil Kumar v. T. Vs State of Kerala

Anil Kumar K.C. Vs State of Kerala

Nibin K.B. Vs State of Kerala

Shihabudheen Vs the State of Kerala

Sajitha Kumari Vs State of Kerala

Subhash Vasu Vs State of Kerala